# Fifty Shades of Grey



## Confused42

Well Ladies if you get tired of your husband just start reading these books. You will really hate him then!!


----------



## Gaia

Confused42 said:


> Well Ladies if you get tired of your husband just start reading these books. You will really hate him then!!


I planned on getting this books... not to have negative feelings toward my man.. but to read them too him and see what we make of it...


----------



## Gaia

to not too***


----------



## chillymorn

Confused42 said:


> Well Ladies if you get tired of your husband just start reading these books. You will really hate him then!!


we just got the book and I glanced through it some.

kinda on the fence seems like its all about control and power mixed with s&m and pain the main dude if into causing sexuall pain.

just remember its fiction.and don't base your marriage on fiction. if you want your husband to cause you pain and spank you then comunicate it to him.


but I think you like that the dude is confident and carries himself in a manner that is pure alpha. 


maybe try some role play with this aspect. 

again I just glanced through it so maybe I'm off base. now go homw and get a spanking you bad girl!!!!!!


----------



## Jellybeans

I keep hearing about these books. Any good?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## GhostRydr

I was at Costco the other day and seen these books on the table...I skimmed thru the pages and gacked everytime I read this chick referring to herself as "my inner goddess"...plus I cant believe this is whats passing for erotica...

Get the Anne Rice Sleeping Beauty trilogy. Its set in a fantasy Medieval time, has BDSM, maledom, femdom, bi, you name it and its HOT.


----------



## H_B

If you're intersted in reading some great BDSM books check out Total-E-Bound Publishing Bondage and BDSM --- Total-E-Bound Erotic Romance Ebooks


----------



## Runs like Dog

At least it doesn't have Mormon Vampires. Or does it?


----------



## joelmacdad

My wife and I have talked about her reading this series. I think the reviews are about 50/50 toward the good/bad. I think my wife would be okay with it and enjoy it right up to the section where he takes her in a bathroom stall and first pulls her tamp** out to do the deed.


----------



## His_Pixie

The basic concept is the same as any gothic romance, Harlequin romance or beach-reading "bodice-ripper." Virginal, innocent girl/incredibly good-looking, rich, powerful man/love-hate attraction, compulsion.... BUT with the twist of being blatantly BDSM. Otherwise, same old story line. Enjoyable beach reading when you don't really want to think too hard and enjoy the titillation.


----------



## Confused42

Just read them he does start all out being a control freak but Love leads him to the side of the light. Its a great book on how love and compromise makes everything so much better. I promise you guys will enjoy these books. 

Love always prevails. You think he has problems but she does too. I was shocked at how willing and stupid the female role was in the first book. However she sticks to her guns about not wanting the S&M with him. It tares him up and he realizes that he doesnt want it anymore if he can't have her.


----------



## StatusQuo

Someone just emailed me bootleg copies of these to upload to my kindle... I haven't started them yet (have to finish the book I'm reading now first), but I'm curious to see what all the hype is about.


----------



## Jellybeans

GhostRydr said:


> Get the Anne Rice Sleeping Beauty trilogy. Its set in a fantasy Medieval time, has BDSM, maledom, femdom, bi, you name it and its HOT.



I ordered that book from Amazon and seem to have misplaced it. Darn.

Some of my favorite erotica is from Anais Nin. Soo hot.




StatusQuo said:


> Someone just emailed me bootleg copies of these to upload to my kindle...


Haha. Don'tcha just love that we now live in an era where people are bootlegging books online?  Sign of the times.

I am kind of on the fence on whether I want to read 50 Shades or not. I love hot literature like that BUT I am not at all into BDSM. Not my cup of tea.


----------



## Scannerguard

Go on, Jellybeans, you know you want to.

I even chimed in my opinion on the book here at the The Onion. I'm the white guy in the middle:

'Fifty Shades Of Grey' Series Reaches 10 Million Sales | The Onion - America's Finest News Source | American Voices


----------



## StatusQuo

Jellybeans said:


> Haha. Don'tcha just love that we now live in an era where people are bootlegging books online?  Sign of the times.
> 
> I am kind of on the fence on whether I want to read 50 Shades or not. I love hot literature like that BUT I am not at all into BDSM. Not my cup of tea.


Ha! I have to say, it's the first time I've received a bootlegged book! Seemed odd, but heck it's like borrowing it from a friend, right?? almost?? kinda??


----------



## StatusQuo

Jellybeans - Gotta kindle?


----------



## Jellybeans

Scannerguard said:


> Go on, Jellybeans, you know you want to.
> 
> I even chimed in my opinion on the book here at the The Onion. I'm the white guy in the middle:
> 
> 'Fifty Shades Of Grey' Series Reaches 10 Million Sales | The Onion - America's Finest News Source | American Voices


"Just words," huh? If that's the case, no thanks. I'll just stick to Anais. Lol.



StatusQuo said:


> Jellybeans - Gotta kindle?






StatusQuo said:


> Ha! I have to say, it's the first time I've received a bootlegged book! Seemed odd, but heck it's like borrowing it from a friend, right?? almost?? kinda??


Hahaha. It's kind of like stealing (erm, "sharing") someone's Wi-fi code. Hehehehe.


----------



## StatusQuo

Jellybeans said:


> Hahaha. It's kind of like stealing (erm, "sharing") someone's Wi-fi code. Hehehehe.


Uhhhhmmmm... I like the borrowing idea better.  Like a library, yeah, like a library where I don't have to return it... so I get to keep it... without paying for it... okay, so maybe it's like stealing.


----------



## Jellybeans

I like the way you think, Status. And I am a huge fan/supporter of libraries


----------



## StatusQuo

I'm too poor to buy books.  The only books I've read on the kindle have been free downloads from Amazon, so the classics, or poorly written crap, Lol.


----------



## Jellybeans

Well then there is no shame in bootlegging, err, sharing! Haha.

I used to buy books a lot more than I do now. Now I usually get most of them from the library. Unless they don't have what I want.


----------



## eastcoastgirl

I have read 2 of them and am waiting on stonewall to get me the 3rd. I love OMG they are smokingggggggg!


----------



## *needaunderstand*

i love these books!


----------



## Maricha75

Runs like Dog said:


> At least it doesn't have Mormon Vampires. Or does it?


Mormon Vampires????


----------



## Maricha75

StatusQuo said:


> Uhhhhmmmm... I like the borrowing idea better.  *Like a library, yeah, like a library where I don't have to return it... so I get to keep it... without paying for it.*.. okay, so maybe it's like stealing.


Kinda like: I misplaced the book so I will just keep renewing it indefinitely!


----------



## StatusQuo

Maricha75 said:


> Kinda like: I misplaced the book so I will just keep renewing it indefinitely!



Yeah, kinda like that!!


----------



## Gaia

StatusQuo said:


> Uhhhhmmmm... I like the borrowing idea better.  Like a library, yeah, like a library where I don't have to return it... so I get to keep it... without paying for it... okay, so maybe it's like stealing.


Naw... that's just called receiving donations....


----------



## Gaia

Speaking of which... i just received the ebook via "donation" ... wanted to see what all the hype is about soooo plan on reading it to hubs tonight.


----------



## okeydokie

Confused42 said:


> Just read them he does start all out being a control freak but Love leads him to the side of the light. Its a great book on how love and compromise makes everything so much better. I promise you guys will enjoy these books.
> 
> Love always prevails. You think he has problems but she does too. I was shocked at how willing and stupid the female role was in the first book. However she sticks to her guns about not wanting the S&M with him. It tares him up and he realizes that he doesnt want it anymore if he can't have her.


so she hooked up with a bad boy and changed him


----------



## chillymorn

okeydokie said:


> so she hooked up with a bad boy and changed him


in the sequal she kicks him to the curb!


----------



## StatusQuo

chillymorn said:


> in the sequal she kicks him to the curb!


Shhhh... I haven't read them yet!


----------



## Maricha75

StatusQuo said:


> Shhhh... I haven't read them yet!


I *ahem* did the "indefinite library checkout" thing...with all three... there are only 3, right? I did it to see what the hype is about. IF I end up liking them, MAYBE I will then purchase them.... maybe. >.<


----------



## lotsoflove

joelmacdad said:


> My wife and I have talked about her reading this series. I think the reviews are about 50/50 toward the good/bad. I think my wife would be okay with it and enjoy it right up to the section where he takes her in a bathroom stall and first pulls her tamp** out to do the deed.


Ewww, no way! I have heard good things about these books from people who I would never expect to like them.I am on the fence about getting them or not.


----------



## Drover

I had heard a lot about these books and that housewives were all reading them. Given the problems in our marriage, I thought I'd give them a shot and maybe learn something. I started reading the first book and didn't make it to even the first sex scene. It was so badly written it gave me a headache. It read like something a 16 year old might write.


----------



## Maricha75

Drover said:


> I had heard a lot about these books and that housewives were all reading them. Given the problems in our marriage, I thought I'd give them a shot and maybe learn something. I started reading the first book and didn't make it to even the first sex scene. It was so badly written it gave me a headache. It read like something a 16 year old might write.


Not all housewives are interested in that type of literature.


----------



## firedog1

My wife wouldn't share so I bought my own. What the Hell is this crap?


----------



## IsGirl3

if she wouldn't share, she must be enjoying those books, which means she's enjoying reading about the hot sex, so I think you should spice up your sex life!


----------



## StoneAngel

There is a ridiculous nature to Greys. Anyone sitting on the fence about reading it, give the trilogy a whirl. All the stuff about it being demeaning to women is a bit blown up, given that much of the trilogy is about a woman's love can FIX the broken billionaire!

Someone mentioned Anne Rice's Sleeping Beauty Triology....I don't mean to offend but that triology is crap. 
Violent. Violent. Violent. Desensitizing Violence. 
Whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack.....there you have just read Anne Rice's Sleeping Beauty


----------



## Caribbean Man

I have seen this book in only a few book stores and really its not a best seller down here.
The Karma Sutra was a bigger seller than this.
I spoke to one woman whoo read it and she was neither turned on nor impressed.
Not surprising sine most women in these parts define male sexual prowess or dominance in the bedroom by different terms.

Must be cultural.


----------



## Anubis

StoneAngel said:


> There is a ridiculous nature to Greys. Anyone sitting on the fence about reading it, give the trilogy a whirl. All the stuff about it being demeaning to women is a bit blown up, giving that much of the trilogy is about a woman's love can FIX the broken billionaire!
> 
> Someone mentioned Anne Rice's Sleeping Beauty Triology....I don't mean to offend but that triology is crap.
> Violent. Violent. Violent. Desensitizing Violence.
> Whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack.....there you have just read Anne Rice's Sleeping Beauty


ROFL... I just read this outloud and my fiance just said "you forgot 'buttplug' in between the 13th and 14th whack." :rofl:


----------



## StoneAngel

Anubis said:


> ROFL... I just read this outloud and my fiance just said "you forgot 'buttplug' in between the 13th and 14th whack." :rofl:


:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

and let's not talk about the Village!!!!

:rofl::rofl::rofl:


----------



## Anubis

StoneAngel said:


> :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
> 
> and let's not talk about the Village!!!!
> 
> :rofl::rofl::rofl:



My fiance just replied "And I don't want to talk about the Village either" 

:rofl::rofl::rofl:


----------



## Runs like Dog

StoneAngel said:


> Someone mentioned Anne Rice's Sleeping Beauty Triology....I don't mean to offend but that triology is crap.
> Violent. Violent. Violent. Desensitizing Violence.
> Whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack, whack.....there you have just read Anne Rice's Sleeping Beauty



sort of makes sense now that she claims or be Born Again or something like that.


----------



## Runs like Dog

StoneAngel said:


> sitting on the fence


That's in the next installment.


----------



## StoneAngel

Anubis said:


> My fiance just replied "And I don't want to talk about the Village either"
> 
> :rofl::rofl::rofl:


Congrats to you both. 

It is a certain measure of a relationship if together you can read Sleeping Beauty, talk about its contents together and laugh!!!

The two of you have the makings for a brilliant future together


----------



## Anubis

StoneAngel said:


> Congrats to you both.
> 
> It is a certain measure of a relationship if together you can read Sleeping Beauty, talk about its contents together and laugh!!!
> 
> The two of you have the makings for a brilliant future together


Why thank you! We hope our hard work and experience (from prior marriages) is going to pay off in the relationship. 

Though I've only alluded to it here, we're not exactly a 'vanilla' couple. *cough* The '50 shades' phenomenon has been something of an eyeball roller for us.


----------



## mhg's-wife

Drover said:


> I had heard a lot about these books and that housewives were all reading them. Given the problems in our marriage, I thought I'd give them a shot and maybe learn something. I started reading the first book and didn't make it to even the first sex scene. It was so badly written it gave me a headache. It read like something a 16 year old might write.


:iagree:

I read all three, simply because I was curious to see if they got better.
They didn't.
Her sex scenes were so lacking in imagination, and repetitive.


----------



## jaquen

Umm, where is the anti-porn brigade? Surely they'll want to know others are using material outside of their spouses to get aroused? Don't we need a few well placed, classic TAM lectures on the evils of erotica?


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

jaquen said:


> Umm, where is the anti-porn brigade? Surely they'll want to know others are using material outside of their spouses to get aroused? Don't we need a few well placed, classic TAM lectures on the evils of erotica?


That only applies to images and video of naked women.


----------



## Caribbean Man

jaquen said:


> Umm, where is the anti-porn brigade? Surely they'll want to know others are using material outside of their spouses to get aroused? Don't we need a few well placed, classic TAM lectures on the evils of erotica?


:iagree:

:lol:".._Ummmm that's not the same as porn_...":rofl:


----------



## *LittleDeer*

jaquen said:


> Umm, where is the anti-porn brigade? Surely they'll want to know others are using material outside of their spouses to get aroused? Don't we need a few well placed, classic TAM lectures on the evils of erotica?


Hi

Actually- Mr pro demeaning women brigade 

I saw this post the other day, typed a fast reply and lost it on my way out the door.

I will say that I don't believe books are the same as porn, from what I have studied they do not have the same effect on the brain. And they use the imagination, instead of exploiting real people. 

That said I personally do not believe they are healthy, and I don't go for them at all. 

I think if a husband has an issue with their wife reading such trash, then his wife should pay attention and not be dismissive of his feelings.


----------



## Thundarr

*LittleDeer* said:


> That said I personally do not believe they are healthy, and I don't go for them at all.
> 
> I think if a husband has an issue with their wife reading such trash, then his wife should pay attention and not be dismissive of his feelings.


I respect your consistency on the issue LD even though I'm consistent in the other direction a little bit.


----------



## hookares

For those who prefer to read, rather than do, try "The Perfumed Garden". It can destroy an average guy's confidence in less that two chapters and has been around for centuries.


----------



## *LittleDeer*

Thundarr said:


> I respect your consistency on the issue LD even though I'm consistent in the other direction a little bit.


Why thank you.

I would just prefer that my partner makes me want him, and I'm not horny because I read a book, seems counter productive.

Same with porn.


----------



## StoneAngel

jaquen said:


> Umm, where is the anti-porn brigade? Surely they'll want to know others are using material outside of their spouses to get aroused? Don't we need a few well placed, classic TAM lectures on the evils of erotica?


I can get the jest and I know why you posted this. I get the point that men get a lot of hassle about porn and I understand why you are being tongue and cheek. I find it humourous and it gave me a chuckle.

But I will be the first one to bite. Reading material is nothing like Porn. As I said on the other thread. Unless you remove all sound and video and only had a narrator desribe the scenes would it be the same. 

Anyone reading this material developes a fictious person in their mind, unlike the real-life stoned, fake boobed blonde "taking it all" on film. That person is real. That person makes real sounds and in most cases the sounds the watcher is listening to is muffled pain not pleasure. It is not hard to empathise with the chick on screen who's taking it in the rear with a cucmber the diameter of a fist and say [email protected]#k that must hurt!!! and yet for sexual gratification the pain/pleasure centers in men's brains gets messed up. Yes that's right, somehow that can't possibly hurt "she likes it" She's screaming but that's because she likes it!

I know that isn't the kind of porn you watch. That isn't the kind of porn most men watch. 

Funny there is all kinds of porn like that I just mentioned. but no one is watching it. I think before this porn topic gets resolved the men who regularly use it for pleasure and gratification should be subjected to the anal cucumber and while we are on it....horse ****....Not large ****....but an actual HORSE ****. Then they can report back and let us all know if they didn't have to consume drugs and numbing agents like lidocaine in order to survive it!


----------



## *LittleDeer*

hookares said:


> For those who prefer to read, rather than do, try "The Perfumed Garden". It can destroy an average guy's confidence in less that two chapters and has been around for centuries.


Sounds like many women on this site need to give it a go.

Let their men know it gets them going, and they should turn away their spouse in favour of. Also make sure their men folk know they will never live up to the fantasy, and that they desperately need the variety.


----------



## TrustInUs

I do think erotica/romance novels are the same as porn, just a different media format but same concept.


----------



## jaquen

*LittleDeer* said:


> Hi
> 
> I will say that I don't believe books are the same as porn, from what I have studied they do not have the same effect on the brain. And they use the imagination, instead of exploiting real people.



Benjamin K. Bergen: 50 Shades of Grey Matter: Your Mind on Smut

The Mills & Boon effect: Why a romantic read can harm love lives | Mail Online

â€œHe seized her in his manly arms and bent his lips to hersâ€¦â€�. The surprising impact that romantic novels have on our work -- Quilliam 37 (3): 179 -- Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care

Romance novels can become addictive | ksl.com

Are romance novels as bad for relationships as porn?

It took me all of five minutes to come up with these, and there were plenty more articles.

I suppose you somehow missed this, in all your extensive studies. Color me shocked.


----------



## jaquen

StoneAngel said:


> But I will be the first one to bite. Reading material is nothing like Porn.


*50 Shades of Grey Matter: Your Mind on Smut
*

I recently awoke aboard a flight from Chicago to San Diego to notice that the young woman on my left was absorbed in an ereader. As soon as she saw me glancing over, she switched it off and slid it anxiously into her seat pocket, hoping perhaps that I didn't have time to see what she was reading.

But I did have time. And I did see what she was reading. It was smut.

This young woman was one of the more than 40 million people who have read the blockbuster erotic book 50 Shades of Grey, with its graphic descriptions of sexual acts and BDSM (that's Bondage, Discipline, Dominance, Submission, Sadism, and Masochism to you, gentle reader). And I was one of millions of observers who have inadvertently caught them in the act.

50 Shades of Grey is a paradox. Clearly, people experience anxiety when they're caught reading it, because that's how erotic fiction affects people. But at the same time, they don't seem to be able to help themselves. What is it that compels people to devour this book -- to the point where it's already sold more copies than Gone With the Wind?

Fortunately, cognitive scientists like myself have been researching exactly what's going on inside people's brains and bodies while they're reading and listening to language. When you read (whether it's smut or not), you project yourself into the world that the story describes. Language leads you to virtually feel, see and smell the content of language. When you read 50 Shades of Grey, even the parts that don't involve whips and chains, you experience being Anastasia Steele, swooning over the dashing Christian Grey (I'm not making these names up):

_*I surreptitiously gaze at him from beneath my lashes as he stands in line waiting to be served. I could watch him all day... he's tall, broad shouldered and slim, and the way those pants hang from his hips... Oh my. Once or twice he runs his long, graceful fingers through his now dry but still disorderly hair. Hmm... I'd like to do that. The thought comes unbidden into my mind, and my face flames. I bite my lip and stare down at my hands again, not liking where my wayward thoughts are headed.*_

Using varied methods -- brain imaging, carefully tracking people's reaction times, and so on -- our research shows that when you read language like this, your brain acts as though you were actually there. The vision system in your brain becomes active, allowing you to simulate what it would be like to see the dashing Mr. Grey, hips and all. And so does your brain's system for motor control, as you simulate biting down on your lip.

Just like any narrative language, erotic fiction is transporting. It just happens to transport you into experiencing sights and sounds that are emotionally charged and sexually arousing. If you were Anastasia Steele in flagrante delicto, your pulse would race, you'd start sweating and blood would flush your sexual organs. Reading about Anastasia Steele in such a state leads you to actually experience a little of the same.

Consequently, reading smut is arousing. We know this from research that measures the physiological effects of sexual arousal directly. These studies use instruments like the penile plethysmograph or the vaginal photoplethysmograph, which measure blood flow to and expansion or contraction of the relevant organs. And the evidence is very clear; people in general become sexually aroused when they read smut , and -- although there's a history in the field of thinking otherwise -- women become just as aroused when they read hard-core pornography, like 50 Shades of Grey, as when they read romantic fiction. Reading sexual narratives even increases people's sex drive and frequency of sexual activity. And here's the kicker -- it increases libido more in women than in men.

So perhaps there's a massive yet previously untapped female readership for erotica. But for it to work, readers have to identify with the characters. Not coincidentally, 50 Shades appears to be extremely accessible, especially to the female reader. Intentional or not, the author's choices are particularly well suited to make the reader identify with the protagonist. Anastasia is a recent college graduate, naïve but bright and spunky, who falls for an older, mysterious, powerful man. There's certainly a decent-sized readership who can identify directly with a character like that. What's more, Anastasia narrates the book in the first person, and according to recent research, readers are more likely to adopt the perspective of a narrative character when the writing uses the first person (I) than, for example, the third person (she).

So 50 Shades appears to have hit a sweet spot -- it has an accessible protagonist, it's stylistically suited to have people empathize with her and it's intrinsically arousing to the point of increasing libido.

Ironically, the very same things that make 50 Shades so compelling are also the things that give the reader a jolt of anxiety when caught reading it in public. To the extent that the young lady next to me on the plane was transported into the narrated body and experiences of Anastasia Steele, she was actually experiencing arousal; she was actually, in a limited way, feeling as though she were carrying on with Christian Grey. That might be an embarrassing experience to have an airplane next to a stranger.

Your mind on smut is very much like your mind on any other type of narrative. Language has a remarkable effect on us -- it takes us out of this world and drives us to simulate ourselves in different places, positions and bodies. In the case of 50 Shades of Grey, the narrative transports the reader's mind into positions that might be inappropriate where her body actually is.

_Benjamin K. Bergen is the author of Louder Than Words: The New Science of How the Mind Makes Meaning (Basic Books, 2012)._


----------



## Caribbean Man

TrustInUs said:


> I do think erotica/romance novels are the same as porn, just a different media format but same concept.


:iagree:

I think so too.

But I'm not against porn, and i'm not against my wife reading erotica.
Anyway she prefers " nice " softcore porn.


----------



## Caribbean Man

jaquen said:


> *50 Shades of Grey Matter: Your Mind on Smut
> *
> 
> 
> Your mind on smut is very much like your mind on any other type of narrative. Language has a remarkable effect on us -- it takes us out of this world and drives us to simulate ourselves in different places, positions and bodies. In the case of 50 Shades of Grey, the narrative transports the reader's mind into positions that might be inappropriate where her body actually is.
> 
> _Benjamin K. Bergen is the author of Louder Than Words: The New Science of How the Mind Makes Meaning (Basic Books, 2012)._


The very first exposure I had to anything erotic was written.
I loved reading and I came across one of my aunt's erotic novel
[ Can't remember the name now , edit: I think it was " Teacher's pet."] But up to this day I remember the characters and the sex acts.
I also remember reading one of her " Penthouse Letters" books.

Unfortunately, 
I can't remember the very first porno I ever looked at.


----------



## TrustInUs

Caribbean Man said:


> :iagree:
> 
> I think so too.
> 
> But I'm not against porn, and i'm not against my wife reading erotica.
> Anyway she prefers " nice " softcore porn.


That's a good thing. Couples should be on the same page with that whether they use it or not. In my case, we don't use porn, nor do I read romance novels or erotica, because to us it's all the same.... even if the man in the novel can't be "seen", its designed to arouse, same as porn. Otherwise, it would just be a story without vivid sex scenes spelled out for you to imagine.

ETA: I don't try to ever tell other couples what is right for their marriage, however I just wanted to express that I thought the two were the same.


----------



## *LittleDeer*

jaquen said:


> Benjamin K. Bergen: 50 Shades of Grey Matter: Your Mind on Smut
> 
> The Mills & Boon effect: Why a romantic read can harm love lives | Mail Online
> 
> “He seized her in his manly arms and bent his lips to hers…”. The surprising impact that romantic novels have on our work -- Quilliam 37 (3): 179 -- Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care
> 
> 
> Romance novels can become addictive | ksl.com
> 
> Are romance novels as bad for relationships as porn?
> 
> It took me all of five minutes to come up with these, and there were plenty more articles.
> 
> I suppose you somehow missed this, in all your extensive studies. Color me shocked.


I think you will find that I said that the written word is not as bad as porn, but where did I say it was good?:scratchhead:

I also said I believe it's bad for relationships, and I don't use it.

However I believe it is not as addictive as porn, nor does it exploit real people, so therin lies the part of difference. 

I'm not sure why you felt the need to aim that at me, when I think it's unhealthy and actually called it trash, and said that if husbands had a problem with it, that wives should not be dismissive of their husbands.

If you agree with those articles then you must absolutely see the harm in porn. 

Colour me shocked that you see what you want and dismiss the rest, once again.


----------



## jaquen

Caribbean Man said:


> The very first exposure I had to anything erotic was written.
> I loved reading and I came across one of my aunt's erotic novel
> [ Can't remember the name now , edit: I think it was " Teacher's pet."] But up to this day I remember the characters and the sex acts.
> I also remember reading one of her " Penthouse Letters" books.
> 
> Unfortunately,
> I can't remember the very first porno I ever looked at.


I too can recall the little written erotica I've read.

And I can also recall it turning me on far more than a lot of the visual porn I've seen.

The bottom line is, despite protests to the contrary, erotica is erotica. The written kind is far older than the visual kind, and it can have a profound effect on the mind. 

The difference is that many women find moral objections to the visual kind (ironically even when they admit they watch, or use to watch), yet there is near deafening silence when it comes to denouncing the material aimed at women.

It's a double standard. There are many double standards, that are in favor/to the detriment of both sexes depending on which one, but I respect those who at least admit that the double standard exists.

Until then threads about written erotica will continue to be generally uplifting, just like threads about sex toys for women, and a generally positive attitude about female masturbation.

And men will continue to be largely villainized, have our perspectives dismissed, and be expected to feel shame surrounding our preferred choice of erotica.


----------



## jaquen

*LittleDeer* said:


> I think you will find that I said that the written word is not as bad as porn, but where did I say it was good?:scratchhead:
> 
> I also said I believe it's bad for relationships, and I don't use it.
> 
> However I believe it is not as addictive as porn, nor does it exploit real people, so therin lies the part of difference.
> 
> I'm not sure why you felt the need to aim that at me, when I think it's unhealthy and actually called it trash, and said that if husbands had a problem with it, that wives should not be dismissive of their husbands.
> 
> If you agree with those articles then you must absolutely see the harm in porn.
> 
> Colour me shocked that you see what you want and dismiss the rest, once again.


Because you've stated several times on this topic that it doesn't affect brain waves the way visual porn does. That is false. 

Because you still continue to say "well it's not as bad as visual porn, even if it's trash". 

Take a look at this topic. It's come up a few times. I've never seen you go on a long anti-erotica rant when it comes to the kind of porn aimed at the female audience. Never once seen you post a link regarding the effects it has on the human brain, the highly unrealistic expectations it can create in it's audience, how damaging it potentially can be for marriages, particularly women's expectations of sex, and love, and the very nature of men. If this was thread filled with page, after page, of pro-visual porn for men, you'd have been all over it by now.

Even this is interesting:

*and said that if husbands had a problem with it, that wives should not be dismissive of their husbands.*

I have never once seen anybody suggest to you, in all the porn debates, that you didn't have a right to your view. Where people end up debating with you is your insistence that visual porn is wrong for ALL marriages, that ALL men need to give it up, and NOBODY should partake in it because it's ALWAYS harmful.

Yet in the above passage you actually have the sensibility to offer leeway, and say that IF the husband has a problem, then the wife should not be dismissive.

That is exactly what all of us who aren't anti-porn have said to you in debates, countless times. Let the husband and wife decide what's best for their marriage. However, despite this sensible approach, you still insist that it doesn't matter how the people in the marriage feel, nobody should be watching.

Note, again, the double standard.



*LittleDeer* said:


> If you agree with those articles then you must absolutely see the harm in porn.


No. The difference between you and I is that I know porn can be harmful. Depending on the person. I just don't believe it's a one-size-fits-all deal. It's not different than alcohol; fine for some, detrimental for others.


----------



## *LittleDeer*

jaquen said:


> Because you've stated several times on this topic that it doesn't affect brain waves the way visual porn does. That is false.


So we both agree porn and erotica etc effect the brain- yet you say porn isn't harmful to most men- weird.

I have said countless times that porn and written erotica are bad for relationships.

Please show me how the written word effects the brain the same as pornographic images on a screen that use real people?
watching porn is highly addictive and more addictive then even printed porn in a magazine. Whilst that porn is also bad, and I believe harmful, from what I've studied it hasn't had the same effect on the brain as internet film porn etc. 



> Because you still continue to say "well it's not as bad as visual porn, even if it's trash"


. 
It's not, there is a lot of things I consider pornographic and harmful but not to the same extent. That's from my research on the subject.

That doesn't make those other things good or OK. They aren't. It's just like comparing watermelon and apples, both fruit but very different.



> Take a look at this topic. It's come up a few times. I've never seen you go on a long anti-erotica rant when it comes to the kind of porn aimed at the female audience. Never once seen you post a link regarding the effects it has on the human brain, the highly unrealistic expectations it can create in it's audience, how damaging it potentially can be for marriages, particularly women's expectations of sex, and love, and the very nature of men. If this was thread filled with page, after page, of pro-visual porn for men, you'd have been all over it by now.


Actually when husbands, and there have been a couple have posted about their wives use of literotica, I have allways said, I believe it's harmful and given the same advice on when a woman has posted on her husbands porn use. S please do not make things up to suit your arguments.




> Even this is interesting:
> 
> *and said that if husbands had a problem with it, that wives should not be dismissive of their husbands.*
> 
> I have never once seen anybody suggest to you, in all the porn debates, that you didn't have a right to your view. Where people end up debating with you is your insistence that visual porn is wrong for ALL marriages, that ALL men need to give it up, and NOBODY should partake in it because it's ALWAYS harmful.


That is my belief and it's also my belief that women shouldn't read written erotica, for various reasons. However usually there are many men posting Porn is not harmful etc etc and justifyng that they should be able to use in spite of the fact that it hurts their wives. 




> Yet in the above passage you actually have the sensibility to offer leeway, and say that IF the husband has a problem, then the wife should not be dismissive.


I'm not offering any leeway, I wasn't asked by anyone, and often don't have time to post every time all the reasons why I think something is harmful. Sorry if that upsets you. 

If someone asks me in a porn thread do I think it's bad for all men, I'll say yes, if someone asks me in a written erotic literature thread if I think it's harmful for all women, my answer is yes. I can of course answer why and why I think they are different yet still harmful when I have more time.



> That is exactly what all of us who aren't anti-porn have said to you in debates, countless times. Let the husband and wife decide what's best for their marriage. However, despite this sensible approach, you still insist that it doesn't matter how the people in the marriage feel, nobody should be watching.
> 
> Note, again, the double standard.


The only double standard is one you have invented and created.
I was congratulated by another poster for being consistent in my views. 





> No. The difference between you and I is that I know porn can be harmful. Depending on the person. I just don't believe it's a one-size-fits-all deal. It's not different than alcohol; fine for some, detrimental for others.


Awesome, I think they are both harmful, all the time for so many reasons.

But thank you.


----------



## Lyris

LittleDear, are you saying that any porn, written or pictoral, is detrimental for all relationships? Has that been your personal experience?

I've been with my husband for more than 20 years. He watches porn sometimes, sometimes we watch together. I read erotica, in fact he often writes it for me, which is great because he tailors it directly to my tastes. Sometimes I write stuff for him.

We have a very happy, monogomous, sexually fulfilled relationship, and one I am confident will continue into our 50s and 60s. When we haven't been so happy, it had nothing to do with porn.

You can't generalise that porn is always bad for relationships. It's just not true.


----------



## *LittleDeer*

Lyris said:


> LittleDear, are you saying that any porn, written or pictoral, is detrimental for all relationships? Has that been your personal experience?
> 
> I've been with my husband for more than 20 years. He watches porn sometimes, sometimes we watch together. I read erotica, in fact he often writes it for me, which is great because he tailors it directly to my tastes. Sometimes I write stuff for him.
> 
> We have a very happy, monogomous, sexually fulfilled relationship, and one I am confident will continue into our 50s and 60s. When we haven't been so happy, it had nothing to do with porn.
> 
> You can't generalise that porn is always bad for relationships. It's just not true.


I say writing for each other is a good idea, I have done that too, however we are the main characters.  It's sharing a fantasy, from your own imagination. :smthumbup:

For so many reasons I believe porn is bad, I have listed them many times.

Most porn is degrading to women, and the most dowloaded and watched porn most certainly is.

I believe it sets unrealistic expectations, and it does effect our brains, how we view men and women and how we react to pleasure.

I also believe those is porn are exploited in the most degrading way possible. It commodifies people, it does not value them.

I believe when the focus is off your spouse that it interferes with human pair bonding, and that's not good for relationships.

I could go on but you get the jist of it.

For many reasons, written erotic literature is bad for relationships too, it can set unrealistic expectations, it does take the focus off your spouse, and again I think it's bad for human pair bonding.

It's like advertising, it effects us, we can try and deny it, but if it didn't work, there wouldn't be so much money spent in this area by companies. 

I read all the time about men and women, having discovered porn and erotic literature, when they were young. I think it's bad for young minds, it helps shape them and their expectations in a harmful way. I believe a good way for teenagers to be educated about sex is through dialogue and text (non pornographic) and even pictures explaining what the human body does etc, and let them develop their own sexuality, rather then get it from pornographic rubbish. JMO.


----------



## Lyris

Okay, I get that's what you believe, that its bad for pair bonding, that it affects the brain in a negative way, but I'm here, telling you of my direct, real life experience that it's not true.

My bond with my husband is just not that fragile. I don't require his full, entire sexual energy and he doesn't require mine. Being sexually excited by images on a screen or by words on paper doesn't affect my bond with him, and I am going to point to our 2 decades of loving monogamy as proof of that.

I don't put much stock in 'research' that is contradicted by my own lived experience. 

And why should sexuality have to develop in a vacuum? I remember reading some pretty racy books as a teen, including one that was definitely pornographic, and they all shaped my sexuality. But again, in a healthy human, sexuality is robust enough to include fantasy and reality and differentiate between the two.


----------



## *LittleDeer*

Lyris said:


> Okay, I get that's what you believe, that its bad for pair bonding, that it affects the brain in a negative way, but I'm here, telling you of my direct, real life experience that it's not true.
> 
> My bond with my husband is just not that fragile. I don't require his full, entire sexual energy and he doesn't require mine. Being sexually excited by images on a screen or by words on paper doesn't affect my bond with him, and I am going to point to our 2 decades of loving monogamy as proof of that.
> 
> I don't put much stock in 'research' that is contradicted by my own lived experience.
> 
> And why should sexuality have to develop in a vacuum? I remember reading some pretty racy books as a teen, including one that was definitely pornographic, and they all shaped my sexuality. But again, in a healthy human, sexuality is robust enough to include fantasy and reality and differentiate between the two.


I think there could be a way to have your fantasies shaped in a healthy way, I don't think modern day porn is natural or healthy in any way.

I know we don't live in a vacuum, I just wish society cared more about people, and treated women with dignity and respect and that was reflected in porn and the way it was made. Also that it didn't create such unrealistic standards and that there were limits. 

I still personally wouldn't watch it and would still prefer my partner desire me, rather then have to watch porn. I think that's healthy.

I also know most people believe they are fine and porn hasn't negatively effected them, however many studies show differently, in fact a pro porn person recently posted links to a study that showed men and women both were more likely to have empathy for women and to buy into myths about rape (women wanting it, asking for it, deserving it) after watching porn. 

Again it's like saying I'm not effected by advertising and consumerism. We all are unless we live in a bubble.


----------



## Caribbean Man

*LittleDeer* said:


> I say writing for each other is a good idea, I have done that too, however we are the main characters.  It's sharing a fantasy, from your own imagination. :smthumbup:
> 
> For so many reasons I believe porn is bad, I have listed them many times.
> 
> Most porn is degrading to women, and the most dowloaded and watched porn most certainly is.
> 
> I believe it sets unrealistic expectations, and it does effect our brains, how we view men and women and how we react to pleasure.
> 
> I also believe those is porn are exploited in the most degrading way possible. It commodifies people, it does not value them.
> 
> I believe when the focus is off your spouse that it interferes with human pair bonding, and that's not good for relationships.
> 
> I could go on but you get the jist of it.
> 
> For many reasons, written erotic literature is bad for relationships too, it can set unrealistic expectations, it does take the focus off your spouse, and again I think it's bad for human pair bonding.
> 
> It's like advertising, it effects us, we can try and deny it, but if it didn't work, there wouldn't be so much money spent in this area by companies.
> 
> I read all the time about men and women, having discovered porn and erotic literature, when they were young. I think it's bad for young minds, it helps shape them and their expectations in a harmful way. I believe a good way for teenagers to be educated about sex is through dialogue and text (non pornographic) and even pictures explaining what the human body does etc, and let them develop their own sexuality, rather then get it from pornographic rubbish. JMO.



Ok Little Deer.

I Understand your point of view , and there is some merit in what you are saying.
However , these things are not that simplistic. What you are saying may be true in some cases , but it is not a general rule.

Your views are Occidental and other cultures view it quite differently. Have a look at how other cultures view sex and you would be surprised.


----------



## WyshIknew

At the risk of being accused of fence sitting I can see both Lyris's and Little Deer's points of view.

I can see that mutual understanding and use of erotica/porn is healthy for a relationship. We have a few dvd's and toy's and use the internet for new ideas. I don't see anything wrong with that.

Where I think the problem arises, and this I think is where Little Deer's 'unrealistic expectations' arise, is when you have situations like many of the threads here.
For example, I have seen a number of threads started where a woman has posted that she is a SAHM and she has read 50 Shades of Grey or whatever. She then goes on to say that she wishes her husband was dominant in bed or more like the characters in the book but he just comes home tired and wants to rest.

Well that's real life, he is possibly doing a job he hates, under pressure to meet deadlines and is worried sick that he may lose his job in the current economic climate and not be able to support his family.
And you expect him to come home and act like Dirk McBigD!ck from some stupid book!
The reverse also applies, hubby may come home and expect his wife to be Miss Fifitrixabelle aka seductive minx from some porn he's watched and all she want's to do is unload what a crappy day she's had and spend a little quality time together.


----------



## Caribbean Man

*LittleDeer* said:


> Again it's like saying I'm not effected by advertising and consumerism. We all are unless we live in a bubble.


.......and that's why I say that the " porn objectifies women " argument against porn is neither a logically sound one, nor applicable, because we are all " objectified " in some way or the other in real life.

Capitalism and consumerism objectifies human beings.Hire purchase and mortgage agreements turns honest , working class people into slaves for the rest of their lives , while the capitalist benefit through obscene profits. 

It can also be said that politics also objectifies people in a real sense , because the masses never get control of a country's natural resources. Only a few amongst the bourgeoisie ruling class really benefit.

Again, these matters are not simple , and everyone has a view.
But with respect to porn, human sexuality is very complex .


----------



## Enchanted

WyshIknew said:


> At the risk of being accused of fence sitting I can see both Lyris's and Little Deer's points of view.
> 
> I can see that mutual understanding and use of erotica/porn is healthy for a relationship. We have a few dvd's and toy's and use the internet for new ideas. I don't see anything wrong with that.
> 
> Where I think the problem arises, and this I think is where Little Deer's 'unrealistic expectations' arise, is when you have situations like many of the threads here.
> For example, I have seen a number of threads started where a woman has posted that she is a SAHM and she has read 50 Shades of Grey or whatever. She then goes on to say that she wishes her husband was dominant in bed or more like the characters in the book but he just comes home tired and wants to rest.
> 
> Well that's real life, he is possibly doing a job he hates, under pressure to meet deadlines and is worried sick that he may lose his job in the current economic climate and not be able to support his family.
> And you expect him to come home and act like Dirk McBigD!ck from some stupid book!
> The reverse also applies, hubby may come home and expect his wife to be Miss Fifitrixabelle aka seductive minx from some porn he's watched and all she want's to do is unload what a crappy day she's had and spend a little quality time together.


I'll admit this happened to me. I was unemployed and my husband was working long hours to pay our mortgage. I decided to join a writers site and became friends with some women writers who were into BDSM. I have no experience with this stuff but I was bored and their stories were so interesting. I spent hours a day posting on a thread listing to their stories and getting excited. I bought a book called "The Romantic Dominant" (or something like that) and showed it to my husband. He was grossed out. I began to get angry at him for not having fun and exciting sex with me even-though sex was never that important to me before. So I started being the aggressor and we did have sex but somehow it wasn't so much fun because all my fantasies were of being dominated by men in bed. My ideas about sex became a bit warped and it took some time for my brain to calm down.


----------



## jaquen

*LittleDeer* said:


> So we both agree porn and erotica etc effect the brain- yet you say porn isn't harmful to most men- weird.


Actually I've never said porn "isn't harmful to most men". That's your assumption, your insinuation. I've said most men use it, or have used it, which is a fact.



*LittleDeer* said:


> Please show me how the written word effects the brain the same as pornographic images on a screen that use real people?


Just quoted an entire article. Now please show me the evidence that it doesn't.



*LittleDeer* said:


> watching porn is highly addictive and more addictive then even printed porn in a magazine.


Care to back that up? Seeing as I just posted several articles detailing how addictive written erotica, and romance novels, can be, particularly to the female mind?

. 


*LittleDeer* said:


> S please do not make things up to suit your arguments.


Pot, meet kettle.




*LittleDeer* said:


> However usually there are many men posting Porn is not harmful etc etc and justifyng that they should be able to use in spite of the fact that it hurts their wives.


No, what I see is many men who feel they shouldn't have to justify anything, or ask permission for what they "should be able to use". Another point you seem to be totally oblivious to.

I have said it before, and I'll say it again. If a man deems porn to be a problem, an addiction, HE has to see the problem, and HE has to quit for himself.

That is the case for any addiction. You don't recover because you're doing it for everyone else. Others can play a part, but ultimately you need to break forth from any problem because you're personally convinced that it's not good for you.

And if it's not a problem for a man, but his woman wants to make it a problem, or create an addiction where there is not one? It's her problem, not his. If she can not cope, then she needs to make the decisions that are best for her.

I believe in wives, not glorified mothers. 



*LittleDeer* said:


> Sorry if that upsets you.


I think you flatter yourself a wee bit much. Nothing you have ever said, in any exchange we've had, "upset" me. We're in a debate about porn. We can disagree, but don't go overboard; I'm not crying on my keyboard over you. 






*LittleDeer* said:


> The only double standard is one you have invented and created.


Oh, if only that were true.


----------



## Enchanted

jaquen said:


> Actually I've never said porn "isn't harmful to most men". That's your assumption, your insinuation. I've said most men use it, or have used it, which is a fact.
> 
> 
> 
> Just quoted an entire article. Now please show me the evidence that it doesn't.
> 
> 
> 
> Care to back that up? Seeing as I just posted several articles detailing how addictive written erotica, and romance novels, can be, particularly to the female mind?
> 
> .
> 
> 
> Pot, meet kettle.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, what I see is many men who feel they shouldn't have to justify anything, or ask permission for what they "should be able to use". Another point you seem to be totally oblivious to.
> 
> I have said it before, and I'll say it again. If a man deems porn to be a problem, an addiction, HE has to see the problem, and HE has to quit for himself.
> 
> That is the case for any addiction. You don't recover because you're doing it for everyone else. Others can play a part, but ultimately you need to break forth from any problem because you're personally convinced that it's not good for you.
> 
> And if it's not a problem for a man, but his woman wants to make it a problem, or create an addiction where there is not one? It's her problem, not his. If she can not cope, then she needs to make the decisions that are best for her.
> 
> I believe in wives, not glorified mothers.
> 
> 
> 
> I think you flatter yourself a wee bit much. Nothing you have ever said, in any exchange we've had, "upset" me. We're in a debate about porn. We can disagree, but don't go overboard; I'm not crying on my keyboard over you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, if only that were true.


Porn is like any other pleasurable outlet. Some people can use it once in a while and gain benefits from the medium while others get addicted or form unhealthy attitudes and behaviors. Everybody is different.


----------



## jaquen

Enchanted said:


> Porn is like any other pleasurable outlet. Some people can use it once in a while and gain benefits from the medium while others get addicted or form unhealthy attitudes and behaviors. Everybody is different.


1000% agree. :smthumbup:


----------



## ocotillo

--Not trying to be argumentative. I'm just honestly confused over the esoteric definition of porn on TAM. Where is it coming from? :scratchhead: 


Obscene *literature*, art or photography....
_The Random House Unabridged Dictionary_


Obscene *writings*, drawings, photographs or the like...
_Webster's Encyclopedic Unabridged Dictionary_


Obscene *literature*, photographs, paintings, etc.... "
_The New Lexicon Webster's Dictionary_


Sexually explicit pictures, *writing* or other material..."
_The American Heritage Dictionary_


"*Literature* in which prostitutes figure: Obscene writing..."
_The New Webster Encyclopedic Dictionary_


"Pornography is Greek for "Writings of Harlots"....The first masterpiece of English pornography is probably John Cleland's _Memoirs of the Life of Fanny Hill _(1749)"
_The Encyclopedia Of Word And Phrase Origins_

Fifty Shades is porn in the purest sense of the word.


----------



## Thundarr

Enchanted said:


> Porn is like any other pleasurable outlet. Some people can use it once in a while and gain benefits from the medium while others get addicted or form unhealthy attitudes and behaviors. Everybody is different.


With freedom comes responsibility. Freedom to choose is the core issue of the porn debate a lot of the time. Many of the "don't tell me I can't watch porn" crowd (me included) would be pretty flexible if our wive/husband had issue. Actually I rarely watch it. A lot of the porn hating threads on TAM are a direct result of the husband being insensitive about what his wife thinks or sneaking about it. Then those posters end up debating the issue with other posters who do not do these things.

Maybe? I don't know anymore about this issue.


----------



## Enchanted

Thundarr said:


> With freedom comes responsibility. Freedom to choose is the core issue of the porn debate a lot of the time. Many of the "don't tell me I can't watch porn" crowd (me included) would be pretty flexible if our wive/husband had issue. Actually I rarely watch it. A lot of the porn hating threads on TAM are a direct result of the husband being insensitive about what his wife thinks or sneaking about it. Then those posters end up debating the issue with other posters who do not do these things.
> 
> Maybe? I don't know anymore about this issue.


There is so much more important stuff to deal with in life then to worry about porn, unless of course it's an obsession. I've seen several porn movies and they're hilarious.


----------



## Lyris

*LittleDeer* said:


> I think there could be a way to have your fantasies shaped in a healthy way, I don't think modern day porn is natural or healthy in any way.
> 
> I know we don't live in a vacuum, I just wish society cared more about people, and treated women with dignity and respect and that was reflected in porn and the way it was made. Also that it didn't create such unrealistic standards and that there were limits.
> 
> I still personally wouldn't watch it and would still prefer my partner desire me, rather then have to watch porn. I think that's healthy.
> 
> I also know most people believe they are fine and porn hasn't negatively effected them, however many studies show differently, in fact a pro porn person recently posted links to a study that showed men and women both were more likely to have empathy for women and to buy into myths about rape (women wanting it, asking for it, deserving it) after watching porn.
> 
> Again it's like saying I'm not effected by advertising and consumerism. We all are unless we live in a bubble.


I'm not saying I haven't been affected by porn, or anything else I've watched or seen. What I'm saying is that my relationship and bond with my husband has not been negatively impacted by either he or I watching porn. 

Did you mean more likely to lack empathy for women? I have read many studies like that, mostly relating to violent video games and their affect on children/teenagers. And although there often seems to be a temporary change in attitude, that shifts back to previous levels over time with good real-world experience. 

Again, to point to real, demonstrated actions in the world, if violent video games really had the effect that detractors claim when they point to brain changes, society where I live would have exploded into violence. 30 years ago, video games were basically pong, space invaders or text adventure games. Now they are elaborate, first person shooters in an endless array of situations. And yet, violent crime has decreased in all areas.

You could say the same of porn and the incidence of rape. Porn use has increased exponentially since the advent of the internet. And yet rape as a crime has decreased, certainly in my country. I also read a study recently which linked the drop in divorce to increased porn viewing among men. 

I agree with you about your concerns over the nature of the porn industry. I think it is exploitative of vulnerable young people, most of them women, although young gay men are also at risk. It's not an industry I particularly want my daughters involved in. But I also don't believe it is evil across the board. In fact, if either of my daughters did get involved, I would continue to supply the solid, loving base that I always have and I would trust that that would probably ameliorate much of the risk.



> I still personally wouldn't watch it and would still prefer my partner desire me, rather then have to watch porn. I think that's healthy.


My partner doesn't have to watch porn. He chooses to. And he desires me also. It's not an either-or. And that is equally healthy.


----------



## StoneAngel

jaquen said:


> *50 Shades of Grey Matter: Your Mind on Smut
> *
> 
> 50 Shades of Grey is a paradox. Clearly, people experience anxiety when they're caught reading it, because that's how erotic fiction affects people. But at the same time, they don't seem to be able to help themselves. What is it that compels people to devour this book -- to the point where it's already sold more copies than Gone With the Wind?
> 
> Fortunately, cognitive scientists like myself have been researching exactly what's going on inside people's brains and bodies while they're reading and listening to language. When you read (whether it's smut or not), you project yourself into the world that the story describes. Language leads you to virtually feel, see and smell the content of language. When you read 50 Shades of Grey, even the parts that don't involve whips and chains, you experience being Anastasia Steele, swooning over the dashing Christian Grey (I'm not making these names up):
> 
> 
> *Just like any narrative language*, erotic fiction is transporting. It just happens to transport you into experiencing sights and sounds that are emotionally charged and sexually arousing. If you were Anastasia Steele in flagrante delicto, your pulse would race, you'd start sweating and blood would flush your sexual organs. Reading about Anastasia Steele in such a state leads you to actually experience a little of the same.
> 
> Your mind on smut is very much like your mind on any other type of narrative.* Language has a remarkable effect on us *-- it takes us out of this world and drives us to simulate ourselves in different places, positions and bodies. In the case of 50 Shades of Grey, the narrative transports the reader's mind into positions that might be inappropriate where her body actually is.
> 
> _Benjamin K. Bergen is the author of Louder Than Words: The New Science of How the Mind Makes Meaning (Basic Books, 2012)._


This is a brilliant article and I don't disagree with it at all, but I have highlighted: the point of the article is about language and what our mind does with expressive language.

As yourself and CM have stated...I have no doubt you would retain memories of written material of a sexual nature than videography. It is because you have the capacitiy to expand and own the images you create in your mind. 

I did not say in my original post that men are dark bad creatures for having sexual urges and fantasy. I did not say that men objectify women....although they do...just as much as women objectify men. i don't think that is a bad thing. We are sexual beings. We should be enraptured in eachother. In all forms of connection and that includes sexually.

I know later in this thread a member listed definitions for Porn. Literary compositions were part of that definition, but this is where I disagree. I believe the definition is not narrow enough.

[B A bicycle and a car both have wheels, can get you from point A to point B and are both by definition modes of transportation...but they are very different.[/B]

I believe every man has the right to posess whatever thoughts they wish, imagine women in whatever capacity to enjoy themselves sexually. It is completely acceptable for a man to picture his woman/wife in whatever "dirty, degrading" position he chooses.

But for me, literary sexual simuli will never be the same as video/photographic porn, because the people involved are fictious vs real, have real consequences vs preceived consequences...and the list goes on.
Although both mediums stimulate, arouse, cause anxiet, excitement ......they are not the same. For me they will not be the same until every man feels it is an achievement and and acomplishment for their wife and daughter to be a striper, hooker or pornstar. Somehow I don't think that will happen though!


----------



## Thundarr

StoneAngel said:


> But for me, literary sexual simuli will never be the same as video/photographic porn, because the people involved are fictious vs real, have real consequences vs preceived consequences...and the list goes on.
> Although both mediums stimulate, arouse, cause anxiety ......they are not the same. For me they will not be the same until every man feels it is an achievement and anl acomplishment for their wife and daughter to be a striper, hooker or pornstar. Somehow I don't think that will happen. though!


A lot of people have that mindset. I however find erotica and porn to be very similar. Sure real people made the movie but most people (IMO) who currently argue this point also find anime to be considered porn. For that matter when actors are no longer needed and we have a multitude of animated characters who look 100% real I suspect everyone currently saying REAL people are what makes the difference will then find another argument to dislike visual porn verses textual porn.


----------



## always_alone

ocotillo said:


> Fifty Shades is porn in the purest sense of the word.


I haven't read it myself, nor will I, but I've no doubt this is true. 
And really the only difference between books like this and Internet videos is that the characters are not real people. This is no small difference given just how gross the porn industry can be -- but "literature" like this is still just perpetuating bullsh*t fantasies and awful stereotypes that reduce humans and sexuality to meaningless drivel. 

I mean "spunky college grad" attracted to domineering man? Someone called that relateable, and I suppose he must be right on some level given the sales figures, but I have never liked or been able to relate to any of these two-dimensional caricatures whining and pining endlessly for some prince to come save them. Blech!

But at the same time, I am less inspired to comment on this stuff because there is no one standing up to insist that I should like it or accept it in my house; no one advising that I should act more like Anastasia to rev up my sex life; no one saying it fulfills the biological need for variety that is so essential for their sexuality to flourish; no one adamantly defending it as a need for masturbation. Indeed, most everyone seems to mostly agree that it is just as trashy as internet porn. What's to argue in that?


----------



## Runs like Dog

It's a twisted up form of "Clue". Miz Blowjangles in the study with heat shrink tubing and a hair dryer.


----------



## StoneAngel

Thundarr said:


> A lot of people have that mindset. I however find them both to be virtual. Sure real people made the movie but most people (IMO) who currently argue this point also find anime to be considered porn. For that matter when actors are no longer needed and we have a multitude of animated characters who look 100% real I suspect everyone currently saying REAL people are what makes the difference will then find another argument to dislike visual porn verses textual porn.


Animated characters can not feel PAIN. Animated characters are not left with feelings of shame. Animated characters are not denied their rights. Animated characters are not trafficed to foreign lands and have their passports withheld from them and the list goes on


----------



## Thundarr

StoneAngel said:


> Animated characters can not feel PAIN. Animated characters are not left with feelings of shame. Animated charaters are not denied their rights. Animated characters are not trafficed to foreign lands and have their passports withheld from them and the list goes on


Maybe your take on it is common with anti porn views but I think the other arguments would jump up to replace the human thing if anime and animated for example were more prevelant.

I think most of the erotica is ok but porn is not crown would still be saying erotica is ok but animated porn is not.


----------



## StoneAngel

Runs like Dog said:


> It's a twisted up form of "Clue". Miz Blowjangles in the study with heat shrink tubing and a hair dryer.


I love this. I just had a wonderful laugh! It was a good time for us to stop taking ourselves so seriously.

Thanks :smthumbup:


----------



## StoneAngel

Thundarr said:


> Maybe your take on it is common with anti porn views but I think the other arguments would jump up to replace the human thing if anime and animated for example were more prevelant.
> 
> I think most of the erotica is ok but porn is not crown would still be saying erotica is ok but animated porn is not.


I wish there would come a day that animated porn was more prevelant! 

And you are probably right the anti-porn argument would probably jump to replace the human thing if anime was, but truly at that point the argument would just be moralistic self-righteousness. That shaming would be pretty easy to keep out of your bedroom and out of your fantasies.


----------



## ocotillo

StoneAngel said:


> I know later in this thread a member listed definitions for Porn. Literary compositions were part of that definition, but this is where I disagree. I believe the definition is not narrow enough.
> 
> [B A bicycle and a car both have wheels, can get you from point A to point B and are both by definition modes of transportation...but they are very different.[/B]


I agree with you that a bicycle and a car are very different but instead of bastardizing general terms like 'vehicle' and 'conveyance' to mean whatever we want them to mean, the solution is to be more specific with one's terminology.

A sexually explicit story or novel is pornography in the purest sense of the word inasmuch as the word was originally coined to describe a sexually explicit story or novel. The word is a fusion of the feminine noun, πορνη (prostitute) and the infinitive, γραφειν (To write) and it was coined many hundreds of years before the camera was even invented. Photography and motion pictures are very late, very recent additions to this genre. 

All of us inject a little subjective perception into the words we use, but those perceptions are subordinate to a set of objective definitions that exist to keep us all on the same page.


----------



## jaquen

I've said it before, and I'll say it again; far more people in this world are exploited at the hands of major corporations, all to feed the every hungry Western lifestyle. We live the richest lives of any human beings collectively in the history of the world, and we do it largely on the backs of cheap labor who work long hours, in horrendous conditions, making pennies on the dollar. 

So when I see more women just as equally up in arms about 95% of the cheap goods in their homes, or protesting people walking into Walmart, Target, K-Mart, and the like, then I'll muster more sympathy for the moral indignation surrounding exploitation in the Adult film industry.

It's a bit tough for me to take a person seriously who is up in arms over incidences of exploitation on a porn set somewhere, while wearing a blouse stitched by a Chinese worker whose been on a 16 hour shift, with no break, and made maybe two US dollars bring you the latest in "I must shot cheap for my family's sake" econo-wear.


----------



## always_alone

jaquen said:


> I've said it before, and I'll say it again; far more people in this world are exploited at the hands of major corporations, all to feed the every hungry Western lifestyle. We live the richest lives of any human beings collectively in the history of the world, and we do it largely on the backs of cheap labor who work long hours, in horrendous conditions, making pennies on the dollar.
> 
> So when I see more women just as equally up in arms about 95% of the cheap goods in their homes, or protesting people walking into Walmart, Target, K-Mart, and the like, then I'll muster more sympathy for the moral indignation surrounding exploitation in the Adult film industry.
> 
> It's a bit tough for me to take a person seriously who is up in arms over incidences of exploitation on a porn set somewhere, while wearing a blouse stitched by a Chinese worker whose been on a 16 hour shift, with no break, and made maybe two US dollars bring you the latest in "I must shot cheap for my family's sake" econo-wear.


A fallacy: A is not wrong because B is just as bad -- maybe worse.

And you are making a lot of assumptions about the way we are dressed.


----------



## jaquen

always_alone said:


> A fallacy: A is not wrong because B is just as bad -- maybe worse.


There is no fallacy, considering that I qualified the statements with my own personal reaction:
_
*I'll muster more sympathy* for the moral indignation surrounding exploitation in the Adult film industry._

_It's a bit t*ough for me* to take a person seriously...
_

I did not say that because A is not wrong, B is just as bad. I said that when the person reacts to A just as stringently as they do B, then_ I personally_ will sympathize with their moral indignation. Until then, I personally don't take them seriously.

Especially when I do NOT believe the vast majority of women who object to porn are doing it primarily for the good of all womankind. I think that is, more often than not, a convenient smokescreen to mask the primary cause; my man likes looking at other women he considers hot, which makes me feel lesser than, insecure, and like utter sh*t. 

Because, as mentioned before, something tells me those who are strictly against porn for "exploitation" purposes would still have a problem with their husbands watching animated, and computer generated, porn (which is plentiful, and projects even more exaggerated, unrealistic perspectives for the female form).



always_alone said:


> And you are making a lot of assumptions about the way we are dressed.


In the US alone, there is not a single citizen who is not benefiting from the mass exploitation of others. So even if you're not wearing the "cheap blouse", you, just like me, are still a supporter of human exploitation.


----------



## Caribbean Man

always_alone said:


> A fallacy: A is not wrong because B is just as bad -- maybe worse.
> 
> And you are making a lot of assumptions about the way we are dressed.


And you anti porn folks also make a lot of assumptions about porn.
In an earlier post it was noted that anime porn was not real people and so cannot feel pain and shame.

Such assumptions are based on the fallacy that those who act in porn actually feel pain and shame because of their roles. As far as I know , these people are handsomely paid and very few of them express shame for their actions.
Many of the females actually invest in cosmetic surgeries to enhance their bodies in an effort to command higher salaries and viewer ratings.

Compare it to a sport like boxing . Boxers feel real pain , it is a known fact that after a full career of boxing , many of them retire damaged . Yet they do it simply because they want to . Some do it for the money , others for the fame.
Is boxing inhumane ? Should it be replaced by anime too?

Again , these things are not that simple. A lot of the anti arguments are based on morals , which as we know is like quicksand. 
If a woman can have sex with whomsoever she wants , then she can determine if she wants to have sex for money .
If she so decides , then she can determine how much money her sexuality is worth.
Once she establishes that worth,she can also determine whether or not she wants the acts to be recorded and distributed for public consumption. All of this is within her fundamental rights as a human being.
It's called freedom of choice.

In fact , everyone who acts in a porn film must first sign a LEGAL document stating such , which is kept for inspection by the Government.


----------



## Lily85

I haven't read the trilogy but wouldn't mind. My husband has even encouraged it. When I read books like that I'm always jumping him and wanting to try new things- he loves it.

I recently read "Release Me"- a tamer version of 50 Shades. Man it was hot. My husband loves when I share scenes from books like that and we try our own versions. It works for us because we both realize it's fictional and giving me 23 orgasms in one night is unrealistic. But we have fun doing things our own way- we're both pretty open and adventurous though.

I do agree it becomes a problem when women expect it to be real- then find themselves disappointed when the scenes from the book aren't compatible with the real life sex scenes. Romance books like that can suck a woman into a fictional world and leave them seeking more than what they have- which can take a toll on their relationship. 

I think all women have that inner craving for a man like the one we read about in practically every romance book (the quiet, drop-dead gorgeous, stubborn, often hard-to-read manly man who has this incredibly dark passionate side to him- which he uses and reveals in the bedroom with his insanely awesome, weak-in-the-knees sexual talents and his ninja ability to give her several orgasms in one night. You know, where all his focus is on pleasing her and taking care of her to show how perfect he is- but then he has his secrets on the side she's desperately trying to learn about- making him all the more mysterious and sexy. All he wants is her, all he craves is her and he'll slay dragons for her- because, well, he's perfect). You get my drift.

Instead, I look at all the sexy qualities in my husband and focus on why I'm attracted to him- then have fun in the bedroom with him. Anyway, that was long.


----------



## always_alone

jaquen said:


> I did not say that because A is not wrong, B is just as bad. I said that when the person reacts to A just as stringently as they do B, then_ I personally_ will sympathize with their moral indignation. Until then, I personally don't take them seriously.
> 
> Especially when I do NOT believe the vast majority of women who object to porn are doing it primarily for the good of all womankind. I think that is, more often than not, a convenient smokescreen to mask the primary cause; my man likes looking at other women he considers hot, which makes me feel lesser than, insecure, and like utter sh*t.


I can't speak for anyone else here, but what keeps me responding is the ongoing dismissal of perfectly valid criticisms as just "women's insecurities", and endless assumptions about what else we believe or do.


----------



## jaquen

always_alone said:


> I can't speak for anyone else here, but what keeps me responding is the ongoing dismissal of perfectly valid criticisms as just "women's insecurities", and endless assumptions about what else we believe or do.


Perfectly valid to whom?

You can find plenty of women, and even some men, who will get together with you and talk about the evils of women (funny how men in porn are often left out of this) being exploited in porn.

But you're not likely to find too many men who will give it up just because you go on a "porn objectifies women" tirade.

So as long as the argument is just for argument sake, and not looked at as a valid way to get a man to give it up, I say no harm, no foul. We all have our perspectives.

No to address the other part, are you staying you'd be perfectly happy if your husband dropped the human porn, and stuck strictly to the animated and CGI kind?


----------



## ShawnD

I searched this thread for the name "Katrina" and couldn't find anything, so I assume this was not posted yet:
Katrina Passick Lumsden (Charlotte, MI)'s review of Fifty Shades of Grey

Thankfully this forum automatically edits swears, so I don't need to do any work.

Awesome character development:


> Katrina Passick Lumsden's review Oct 24, 12
> Read from June 01 to 02, 2012
> ...
> Meet Anastasia Steele:
> Ana is just a giant mess of a human being. She's insecure to the point of it being laughable, 'klutzy' (even though she only trips twice in the entire book), and a complete ditz. She's a virgin (of course) who's never taken any sexual interest in anyone before. Right. I'm fairly certain there hasn't been a woman this naive since 'round about 1954. At one point, she thinks putting her hair in pigtails will keep her safe from Christian's lusty advances. ****in' really? She "flushes" constantly, and on several occasions referred to her hoo-hoo-naughty place as "down there."
> 
> Next, we have Christian Grey:
> Christian is a misogynistic, self-loathing, abusive piece of ****. Apparently, his only redeeming qualities are, in this order; his ridiculous good looks, his money, and his giant penis. The only time Ana seems to like him as a person is when he's being "lovable", and those times are few and far between. Most of the time he's serious, brooding, and threatening. How charming.


Extremely hot dialog:


> About halfway through, I wished I'd been keeping track of the word "crap" because Ana is constantly saying/thinking it. Crap, Holy Crap, Double and Triple Crap, Oh Crap, This Crap, That Crap, any and all Crap. Speaking of crap, if I ever, ever ever have to hear/read the words "inner goddess" again, I'm going to construct a pyre out of tampons and maxi pads, light it, and toss unsuspecting women into it.



Romantic behavior:


> Or how about his weird-ass issues with food? He wants the girl slim and in shape, yet he won't stop trying to force her to eat!


Hot sex scenes:


> Since this is considered nothing more than "mommy porn", I will attempt to pander to that particular demographic for a moment. Were the sex scenes well-written? Well, none of it was particularly well-written. The sex scenes could be kind of...honestly, they were kind of boring. I've had more exciting sex myself, so I guess reader response to the sex scenes is dependent on reader experience. There's nothing revolutionary here, and a lot of it is just plain unrealistic. I mean, come on, he pretty much jackhammers her hymen and she walks away with nothing more than a passing, pleasant soreness? Riiiight. How about the time he gives her a handjob with a soapy washcloth? Hello? Apparently neither one of them has ever heard of a urinary tract infection. Oh, or we could talk about her first time giving Christian a blowjob, during which Ana established herself as some kind of Queen of Deepthroat.


Accurate sex education:


> Anyone wanna hear about the tampon scene? Oh, you've already heard about the tampon scene? Yeah, same here, although hearing about it and reading the actual scene are a bit different. For some reason, you imagine it being worse than it actually is, while at the same time, reading about it is more horrifying than you could possibly imagine.
> 
> "He reaches between my legs and pulls on the blue string...what! And...gently pulls my tampon out and tosses it into the nearby toilet."
> 
> Look, I'm not against sex during menses, but a guy plucking out a girl's tampon? Yeah, gross. I'm not a prude, but there are certain lines people just shouldn't cross. What makes it worse is that Christian is just thrilled that Ana's raggin' because he hates using condoms.
> 
> Apparently, Mr. Ginormo**** doesn't know that a woman can get pregnant while on her period. Which is hilarious considering all the teaching and training he's doing to remedy Ana's sexual ignorance.


Optimism that abusive men can be changed:


> Now I'll be totally honest, the biggest issue I have with Fifty Shades of **** is neither the sex nor the horrible writing. It's the plot. Thin as it is, it's still there, its core message being that, given enough time, you can change someone. While I don't have any problem with this if all you're trying to do is help them to lose weight or quit smoking, when you're talking about an emotionally and (dangerously close to) physically abusive relationship, sending that kind of message is ridiculous and irresponsible. Christian is controlling, possessive, condescending, and cruel. He doesn't allow Ana to behave as she normally would, and Ana just puts up with it, insistent that if she can give him what he wants, when he wants, as often as he wants, she can eventually begin to pull his strings. Will it work? In the books, probably. In real life? No. Almost never. How many misguided women are going to waste their lives on some emotionally retarded prick because they've read **** like this and think this kind of ****ed-up fairytale will come true for them? I've known women with this mentality. "Oh, he's so dark and dangerous and threatening, but he's got a sad, lonely side, and if I could just figure out what's wrong, I could change him!"


Stalkers (just like Edward Cullen) are fun:


> Christian stalks Ana (which she turns into a ****ing joke), and whispers things to her "threateningly". She's constantly afraid he's going to beat the crap out of her, and with good reason as he, on more than one occasion, tells her he's going to/wants to.


Rape is not a big deal:


> Potential rape is downplayed. Ana's friend, Jake Jose, starts pushing himself on her rather vehemently when they're both drunk. Ana repeatedly says no, but Jose just keeps trying to go in for the kill. Admiral Chaps busts on up with his riding crop, however, and saves her. Ana (understandably) avoids Jose for a while after that, and when her other friend asks her why, all Ana says is, "He made a pass at me." Later on, she and Jose are friends again, the "attempted kiss" forgotten. *Sigh*
> 
> Rapists appear to be a theme. Christian tells Ana that he gets off on having complete and total control over another person. This is not just in the bedroom, but in Ana's overall life. On several occasions, he fails to yield when Ana says no, plunging on regardless, assured she'll like whatever he does, anyway, so why bother stopping?
> 
> And there are women out there who think this is romantic.
> 
> I wish you the best of luck, ladies. May you get everything your hearts desire And when your dreamboats start giving you black eyes and pushing you down stairs, don't come crying to me


He's abusive, but I still love him:


> And we're treated to her alternately being angry about the pain and humiliation she faced at Christian's hands, and chastising herself for being a failure and for being mean to Christian. It really is classic abuse mentality.


----------



## jaquen

It's extraordinary how badly written this tripe is.


----------



## Enchanted

I haven't read the trilogy but from what I read on this thread it seems to be classic "housewife porn." 

#1 Female Fantasy - To be gang raped.

Do women want to be raped in real life?

*NO*.


----------



## ShawnD

Enchanted said:


> I haven't read the trilogy but from what I read on this thread it seems to be classic "housewife porn."
> 
> #1 Female Fantasy - To be gang raped.
> 
> Do women want to be raped in real life?
> 
> *NO*.


Yeah, sure. And when men watch porn featuring a hot delivery girl who has sex with clients for no reason, it's because they don't actually want that to happen in real life.


----------



## ocotillo

Or how about this?


_
“Aargh!” I cry out on the tenth slap – and I’m unaware that I have been mentally counting the blows.

“I’m just getting warmed up.”

He hits me again then he strokes me softly. The combination of the hard stinging blow and his gentle caress is so mind numbing. He hits me again… this is getting harder to take.

My face hurts, it’s screwed up so tight. He strokes me gently and then the blow comes. I cry out again.

“No one to hear you, baby, just me.”

And he hits me again and again. From somewhere deep inside, I want to beg him to stop. But I don’t. I don’t want to give him the satisfaction. He continues the unrelenting rhythm. I cry out six more times. Eighteen slaps in total. My body is singing, singing from his merciless assault."_
​


----------



## Enchanted

ShawnD said:


> Yeah, sure. And when men watch porn featuring a hot delivery girl who has sex with clients for no reason, it's because they don't actually want that to happen in real life.


Shawn.

In real life women *don't want to be gang raped*. 

Do you understand that????


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

My biggest problem with this discussion has been the idea that written porn is less harmful than cinematic porn because the people are imagined. I watched the Grinch who stole Christmas with Jim Carrey the other night... am I to believe the Grinch is real?

The vast majority of movies are pure fiction, am I to believe this character is real because a live actor is portraying them rather than an author describing them? I don't see any distinction here.

To me, it has nothing to do with the actors, or characters. It has to do with the entire scenario. For men, this might mean some stupid scenario of boning the hot 19yo babysitter or having an orgy with the yoga class. lol For women, this might mean having Christian Grey dominate them or being taken by vampires. None of these people are real, and the only people who have problems with it are the people who are insecure about it or compulsive about it.

In fact, I suspect that the women who complain about their husbands not being "dominant" enough in bed, would just be complaining that their husbands weren't considerate, generous or romantic enough if these men did just "take them."

The truth is that all of this porn use is about the lack of diversity or intensity in our sex lives. A new movie, or a new book, and poof... you're experiencing these things you crave.

I think the issues that the crowd complaining, "he desires the porn and not me" or "I'm jealous of the computer" or "she wants me to be this impossible fictitious character" is actually a minority, and it has more to do with one's own insecurity than porn.


----------



## always_alone

Enchanted said:


> Shawn.
> 
> In real life women *don't want to be gang raped*.
> 
> Do you understand that????


Since I already know what it feels like to be raped, I don't want to fantasize about it either -- gang or otherwise.

Talk about turn-offs!!!!


----------



## ocotillo

Enchanted said:


> Do you understand that????


I understand.

There's a scene in _Bram Stoker's Dracula _where Jonathan Harker is being held prisoner by Dracula's three brides. As a man, I can recognize the erotic appeal of being chewed on by three beautiful semi-nude women without really wanting to experience it in real life, given the fact that in the movie, it damn near killed him.

But vampires are imaginary. Sociopaths are not. In that respect, _Fifty Shades _blurs the line between fantasy and reality. 

Why do I say this? Because you don't have to look very hard on this forum and others to find women bristling at male criticism of the book and responding like this: "You just don't like it because it hits too close to home. You're obviously no Christian Grey." 

Clearly Christian Grey is real to them in the sense that they believe meeting a man like him might actually happen some day.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Enchanted said:


> Shawn.
> 
> In real life women *don't want to be gang raped*.
> 
> Do you understand that????


Not all men are into rape fantasies. Hell, there ARE women who HAVE gang rape fantasies. I was with one very sexual girl who loved anime tentacle rape porn! The non-violent rape (by the guy you secretly want anyway of course) is actually the #1 female fantasy according to a number of polls I've seen. Seriously, surprised me too.

#2 or 3 is taking a dildo to their husbands.

Guess what? None of these things are generally going to happen (thank God re: the dildo). Who cares? Fantasy is fantasy. The fault isn't in the fantasy or the porn, its in the mind of the person who thinks they must make the fantasy reality or that they have to be the fantasy. I'm certainly don't think I need penis-tipped tentacles.


----------



## Enchanted

always_alone said:


> Since I already know what it feels like to be raped, I don't want to fantasize about it either -- gang or otherwise.
> 
> Talk about turn-offs!!!!


I'm so sorry this happened to you.


----------



## Enchanted

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Not all men are into rape fantasies. Hell, there are women who HAVE gang rape fantasies. The non-violent rape (by the guy you secretly want anyway of course) is actually the #1 female fantasy according to a number of polls I've seen. Seriously, surprised me too.
> 
> #2 or 3 is taking a dildo to their husbands.
> 
> Guess what? None of these things are generally going to happen (thank God re: the dildo). Who cares? Fantasy is fantasy. The fault isn't in the fantasy or the porn, its in the mind of the person who thinks they must make the fantasy reality.


FYI - I mentioned that the #1 Fantasy of Women is to be gang raped a couple of posts back. Shawn seems to think women really want this to happen which I pointed out isn't the case.


----------



## Enchanted

Now I need to go to work before I lose 50 Shades of Brain Cells.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Enchanted said:


> FYI - I mentioned that the #1 Fantasy of Women is to be gang raped a couple of posts back. Shawn seems to think women really want this to happen which I pointed out isn't the case.


Sorry, I think I accidentally skipped some posts.


----------



## always_alone

jaquen said:


> But you're not likely to find too many men who will give it up just because you go on a "porn objectifies women" tirade.


Of course not. The pro-porn argument goes something like this: I like it, I watch it, I want to watch it, I don't care what you think, you can't stop me. Might as well add nanny nanny poo too to the end.

The anti-porn arguments offer a variety of political, social, personal, religious (although this is not my slant), perspectives, which are typically dismissed with "you are fat and ugly, and can't please your man. Stop being so insecure and whatever you do, do not challenge where I find my pleasure. If I want to stick my head in the sand, that's my right."



jaquen said:


> No to address the other part, are you staying you'd be perfectly happy if your husband dropped the human porn, and stuck strictly to the animated and CGI kind?


This kind of question is dodging the real issue. I have seen anime that depicts extremely violent rapes in a sexual way. I would be very worried if this sort of thing turned on my SO. I would also be disgusted if he thought it just fine to degrade women or treat them like sperm vessels or masturbatory aids, as seems to be so common in pornographic depictions. The fetish for youth, and putting barely legal girls in pigtails and short kilts is also disturbing. I like to draw a distinction between erotica and porn -- and while the line is fuzzy and difficult, I think it is worth talking about. 

I also don't like having my needs neglected while he seeks his arousal and satiation elsewhere. It makes me want to do the same, but because of my overall responses to porn, including 50 Shades and it's ilk, I can't get it in the same way he does. Thankfully, I still have my imagination, but honestly, all it leads to is a giant wedge between us.


----------



## ocotillo

always_alone said:


> I like to draw a distinction between erotica and porn -- and while the line is fuzzy and difficult, I think it is worth talking about.


I completely agree, but the line doesn't seem very fuzzy to me at all. If sexual activity is depicted it's porn. Otherwise it's not.


----------



## ShawnD

always_alone said:


> Since I already know what it feels like to be raped, I don't want to fantasize about it either -- gang or otherwise.
> 
> Talk about turn-offs!!!!


Then hopefully you are disgusted by "fantasy" literature that features rape and other forms of abuse.

I always love talking about Twilight. It's supposed to be a romance novel, but Edward is an abusive *******. The women gushing over him may not be fantasizing about being raped, but they might fantasize about being abused like crazy. 
Ways Edward Cullen is Abusive - Critical Analysis of Twilight - Fanpop

Check list of Cullen physical and emotional abuse:
-Talking about killing or hurting Bella.
-Breaks into her house to watch her sleep.
-Drives her around even when she doesn't want to go.
-He constantly refers to himself as being an evil monster.
-He attempted suicide after they broke up.
-He gets very jealous around other men, mainly wolfy.
-He took the engine out of her car so he had control over her.
-Repeatedly apologizes and says he won't do it again, then does it anyway.

Why can't I find a boyfriend like Edward??? All of the guys I meet use the door, and they don't enter unless I let them in. None of them have done things like **** up my car to prevent me from going places or talking to people. I would be so turned off if a guy did things like that for me.


----------



## StoneAngel

Caribbean Man said:


> And you anti porn folks also make a lot of assumptions about porn.
> In an earlier post it was noted that anime porn was not real people and so cannot feel pain and shame.
> 
> Such assumptions are based on the fallacy that those who act in porn actually feel pain and shame because of their roles. As far as I know , these people are handsomely paid and very few of them express shame for their actions.
> Many of the females actually invest in cosmetic surgeries to enhance their bodies in an effort to command higher salaries and viewer ratings.
> 
> Compare it to a sport like boxing . Boxers feel real pain , it is a known fact that after a full career of boxing , many of them retire damaged . Yet they do it simply because they want to . Some do it for the money , others for the fame.
> Is boxing inhumane ? Should it be replaced by anime too?
> 
> Again , these things are not that simple. A lot of the anti arguments are based on morals , which as we know is like quicksand.
> If a woman can have sex with whomsoever she wants , then she can determine if she wants to have sex for money .
> If she so decides , then she can determine how much money her sexuality is worth.
> Once she establishes that worth,she can also determine whether or not she wants the acts to be recorded and distributed for public consumption. All of this is within her fundamental rights as a human being.
> It's called freedom of choice.
> 
> In fact , everyone who acts in a porn film must first sign a LEGAL document stating such , which is kept for inspection by the Government.


Obviously your ability to be comprehensive (as in the Poly Second Look thread) went right out the window.

This post is nothing but ignorant justification. 

:rofl::rofl::rofl: Government Inspected :rofl::rofl::rofl:


----------



## always_alone

ocotillo said:


> I completely agree, but the line doesn't seem very fuzzy to me at all. If sexual activity is depicted it's porn. Otherwise it's not.


Don't think it's quite that simple. Something like 50 Shades definitely qualifies, but I wouldn't say that therefore every movie and book with a sex scene in it is pornographic.


----------



## always_alone

ShawnD said:


> Then hopefully you are disgusted by "fantasy" literature that features rape and other forms of abuse.


I haven't read Twilight, but no, I do not read nor do I have any interest in the sexualization of abuse. 

I am utterly flabbergasted at the number of women who find this type of stuff erotic. Maybe it helps to explain how so many end up in abusive and self-destructive relationships. I don't know.

And just to be clear: this doesn't mean I want to start censoring everything that doesn't appeal to me, or play thought police on others' fantasy life. But I also think we should exercise some caution about what it is we are defending.


----------



## Caribbean Man

StoneAngel said:


> Obviously your ability to be comprehensive (as in the Poly Second Look thread) went right out the window.
> 
> This post is nothing but ignorant justification.
> 
> :rofl::rofl::rofl: Government Inspected :rofl::rofl::rofl:


"....... *In the United States Code of Regulations, under title Title 18, Section 2257, no performers under the age of 18 are allowed to be employed by adult industry production companies. The failure to abide by this regulation, results in civil and criminal prosecutions. To enforce the age entry restriction, all adult industry production companies are required to have a Custodian of Records that documents and holds records of the ages of all performers*......."

Source:

Adult film industry regulations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is that comprehensive enough?
Yes?

The next time you look at a porno DVD, before you fast forward to the
" juicy " parts, in the beginning of the DVD there is a section stating that all the actors in the film were over 18 at the time of recording . 
There is a specific identification # attached to the film record, and an address of where the records are kept.


_He who laughs last,
Laughs best.( or probably didn't get the joke )_


----------



## Phenix70

always_alone said:


> I haven't read Twilight, but no, I do not read nor do I have any interest in the sexualization of abuse.
> 
> *I am utterly flabbergasted at the number of women who find this type of stuff erotic. Maybe it helps to explain how so many end up in abusive and self-destructive relationships. I don't know.*
> 
> And just to be clear: this doesn't mean I want to start censoring everything that doesn't appeal to me, or play thought police on others' fantasy life. But I also think we should exercise some caution about what it is we are defending.


Agreed, the 50 Shades books are absolute drivel & do more harm than good because they glorify dysfuntional relationships.
Every time I hear someone go on about how much they liked the books, I tell them to go read a real book about BDSM because the 50 Shades books are really the Splenda of BDSM.


----------



## Thundarr

I don't know. 50 shades seems like such a tiny thing in the grand scheme of marriage. If two people are somewhat compatible and putting in the work then it probably makes marriage all the more spicy. If they had issues already then.....well why blame reading a book for the problems.

If wifey reads 50 shades and wants me to play master or something then that will be cool. If not then that's cool too. Blaming erotical and porn for some peoples lack of self control or personal boundaries is just blame shifting. Bottom line is if porn makes you whack off when you should be sleeping with wife or it makes you think she should love anal then don't watch it (unless she does love anal). If erotica makes you want hubby to rough it off of you then don't read it (unless he want's to rough it off of you).

Just agree on it and do it or don't based on what you both think is ok.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Thundarr said:


> If wifey reads 50 shades and wants me to play master or something then that will be cool. If not then that's cool too. Blaming erotical and porn for some peoples lack of self control or personal boundaries is just blame shifting. Bottom line is if porn makes you whack off when you should be sleeping with wife or it makes you think she should love anal then don't watch it (unless she does love anal). If erotica makes you want hubby to rough it off of you then don't read it (unless he want's to rough it off of you).
> 
> Just agree on it and do it or don't based on what you both think is ok.


:iagree:

Seem simple enough to me.
But people have issues and sometimes it's easier to blame the 
" sacrificial lamb " than to face the truth.


----------



## jaquen

always_alone said:


> Of course not. The pro-porn argument goes something like this: I like it, I watch it, I want to watch it, I don't care what you think, you can't stop me. Might as well add nanny nanny poo too to the end.


That's not a "pro-porn" argument. You haven't seen much of a pro-porn argument on this board. That argument would be filled with people giving testimonies about how porn helped their sexual life, the reciting of the actual (vs widely perceived) history of pornographic material, reinforcements of the positive effects of pornography, links to studies which support porn as more enriching than detracting, etc. 

What largely happens on this board is a battle between the anti-porners and the pro-adultsgettodecidewhattheywanttoenjoyers. 

Because several of the so called "pro-porn" people on TAM actually readily admit that porn has negative downsides, pitfalls, make room for moral objection, and can actually be a huge problem for a lot of men AND women. 

We have barely even scratched the surface regarding an in depth conversation about actual porn. This whole porn debate is still stuck at the basic "men are from Mars, women are from Venus" level. It's the timeless battle of the sexes, using porn as the latest battle ground. We actually have very few real discussions about pornography, and and of itself. This is where I will give Little Dear credit, because at least she spends a good deal of her energy actually discussing pornography.




always_alone said:


> "you are fat and ugly, and can't please your man. Stop being so insecure and whatever you do, do not challenge where I find my pleasure. If I want to stick my head in the sand, that's my right."


If we're speaking of TAM, I think this is far more reflective of the baggage you came here with, and less an actual reflection of any kind of TAM consensus.





always_alone said:


> This kind of question is dodging the real issue.


No, actually it's not. If somebody comes to the table with the objectification of the females working in porn being their primary problem with adult material, than they should be perfectly fine with animated fare.

This, of course, does not speak to people who object for other reasons. 




always_alone said:


> I also don't like having my needs neglected while he seeks his arousal and satiation elsewhere. It makes me want to do the same, but because of my overall responses to porn, including 50 Shades and it's ilk, I can't get it in the same way he does. Thankfully, I still have my imagination, but honestly, all it leads to is a giant wedge between us.


Which is not a porn issue, but a bad husband issue.


----------



## always_alone

jaquen said:


> If we're speaking of TAM, I think this is far more reflective of the baggage you came here with, and less an actual reflection of any kind of TAM consensus.


I was merely paraphrasing the bulk of responses I received to my own posts. I won't pretend to know what the general TAM consensus is. I do know, though, that my attempts to discuss actual issues around porn have mostly been met with a "how dare you try to stop me from watching porn" response. Which was never what I was actually saying.


----------



## always_alone

jaquen said:


> , actually it's not. If somebody comes to the table with the objectification of the females working in porn being their primary problem with adult material, than they should be perfectly fine with animated fare.


I just want to add that there are two different issues here. One is exploitation; the other is objectification. If the only objection is exploitation, then you are right that animated porn should not be a problem because real actors are not involved.

The issue of objectification is different because it includes representations as well. So it isn't just whether there are real actors involved, but how women and men are being presented. And animated porn certainly has some extremely troubling depictions.


----------



## Thundarr

always_alone said:


> I was merely paraphrasing the bulk of responses I received to my own posts. I won't pretend to know what the general TAM consensus is. I do know, though, that my attempts to discuss actual issues around porn have mostly been met with a "how dare you try to stop me from watching porn" response. Which was never what I was actually saying.


I'm sure it seemed that way. Maybe it was that way on occasion.

What I primarily gathered from your "porn hater" thread is that your husband can be an insensitive selfish jerk. He's obviously watching porn when he shouldn't be and may be addicted to it but we don't really know. He certainly is with a woman who doesn't like how often he watches porn or that he ignores her sexually which means something needs to change.

I haven't watched porn in 5-6 weeks or so but my wife alluded to smut tomorrow. If we watch anything I won't have any guiltly conscience about it.


----------



## *LittleDeer*

If written erotica is the same as porn, and just as addictive, why don't we have just as many posts on here per day by men claiming their spouse is rejecting them in favour of erotic novels?

I have seen a few posts from men saying such things, however I've seen hundreds of posts from women talking about how their husbands are addicted to porn, or that it's harming their marriages. Weird

And to draw the argument that erotic literature is just as harmful, you would have to first believe porn was harmful.

If you don't then please stop arguing about something you have no real grasp on. 

Also the same old argument about exploitation, is tired, I will say that sexual exploitation and slavery is different to other types of exploitation. If sex wasn't special and personal and important, (in fact) more important then just about anything we wouldn't be hearing about it of these boards, and men would be happy for their own wives to be prostitutes. I know most people want their spouses to have a job in our capitalist society however mos people would be horrified at the idea of them being a sexual commodity.

I don't like capitalism, I try to buy ethical products, however it's a ridiculous to have to justify caring about women and sexual exploitation, slavery and degradation of women, and compare it to other forms of injustice every time.We can all care about many things at one time, feel free to stop justifying yourselves with this argument and open up threads about those issues if you choose. Saying lots people hurt people every day, so I am too, and and I'll justify it by pointing the finger else where just doesn't cut it. JMO


----------



## Caribbean Man

*LittleDeer* said:


> If written erotica is the same as porn, and just as addictive, why don't we have just as many posts on here per day by men claiming their spouse is rejecting them in favour of erotic novels?
> 
> I have seen a few posts from men saying such things, however I've seen hundreds of posts from women talking about how their husbands are addicted to porn, or that it's harming their marriages. Weird
> 
> There could be many answers to that.
> 1] There are way more women on TAM than men
> 
> 2]Women are ten times more likely than men to seek help when things head southwards in the bedroom
> 
> 3]Most men have not established the connection between their wife's constant rejection and withdrawal and her unrealistic expectations in the relationship. In fact some women have their * erotic literature inspired fantasies * fulfilled by another man outside the marriage.
> Most men don't have a clue.
> 
> And to draw the argument that erotic literature is just as harmful, you would have to first believe porn was harmful.
> 
> If you don't then please stop arguing about something you have no real grasp on.
> 
> That's the point most have been trying to say. It is not that porn does not have a harmful effect on SOME marriages , it is that porn is used as the scapegoat or " sacrificial ram" for every sexual problem facing a marriage in some quarters.
> A tremendous amount of evidence right here on TAM suggest that more than 50% of couples have incorporate porn, or still do into their sexual
> repertoire and have not had any negative impact on their relationship, including myself.
> The same can be said of written erotica. So the argument of whether or not its harmful is purely academic.
> 
> 
> 
> Also the same old argument about exploitation, is tired, I will say that sexual exploitation and slavery is different to other types of exploitation.
> 
> I agree, but who's exploiting who in mainstream, government regulated porn?
> 
> If sex wasn't special and personal and important, (in fact) more important then just about anything we wouldn't be hearing about it of these boards, and men would be happy for their own wives to be prostitutes.
> 
> Whether or not something is special is based purely on the value a person is willing to place on it. There are many people right here on TAM who place different values on sex and intimacy, and that is their fundamental , human right.
> That is why we cannot justifiably discriminate against Gays & Lesbians, people can do with their own bodies whatever they deem fit.
> Enter " casual sex " and http://talkaboutmarriage.com/sex-marriage/58606-threesomes-so-fourth.html
> 
> I know most people want their spouses to have a job in our capitalist society however mos people would be horrified at the idea of them being a sexual commodity.
> 
> That depends on what their value system is. However, most people in porn are either not married or have a different perspective on sex and intimacy.
> Others are just consumers of porn , and they are well within their constitutional rights to choose which LEGAL variety suits them , just like in some states they have a constitutional right to bear arms.
> 
> I don't like capitalism, I try to buy ethical products, however it's a ridiculous to have to justify caring about women and sexual exploitation, slavery and degradation of women, and compare it to other forms of injustice every time.
> 
> You cannot care for a person more than they care for themselves.
> If those involved in the porn industry don't see themselves as being exploited then who are we to tell them to stop?
> There are many organizations waiting for them to make the decision to leave and help them start a bran , new life.
> Evidence suggests that in the USA, over 6000 girls opt to enter the industry, of their own , free will, *EVERY YEAR*.
> This does not include free user submitted amateur porn
> * starlets * on the internet , nor strippers , high priced escorts, prostitutes , massage girls ,and other sex workers.
> As we speak , in my country there is a very strong lobby from feminist organizations , demanding that prostitution be legalized, and sex workers be protected *BY LAW*.
> To me, this seems to be a more progressive approach to the issue of exploitation in the sex industry.
> 
> We can all care about many things at one time, feel free to stop justifying yourselves with this argument and open up threads about those issues if you choose. Saying lots people hurt people every day, so I am too, and and I'll justify it by pointing the finger else where just doesn't cut it. JMO
> 
> Nobody's pointing fingers elsewhere. The " problems " with pornography starts with the actors themselves and ends with the actors themselves.
> Not with you neither me.
> To say otherwise is shifting personal responsibility from those who choose to sell their bodies for a " mess of pottage " to John. Q. Public.
> I think that's called " _blameshifting_."


----------



## Enchanted

CM makes some good points.

Many women/girls are freely posting naked pictures of themselves on the internet out of free will and their not even getting paid.


----------



## jaquen

always_alone said:


> I was merely paraphrasing the bulk of responses I received to my own posts.


I've read the bulk of the responses to your post Always Alone and if you really think that the majority of those can be summed up as:

*"you are fat and ugly, and can't please your man. Stop being so insecure and whatever you do, do not challenge where I find my pleasure. If I want to stick my head in the sand, that's my right."*

Then I can see the source of our conflict. We are looking at the world from two totally different feeds. Because what you stated above in the underlined portion I do not believe to be remotely a true reflection of the "bulk" of anything you've received here on TAM, in any form, or fashion. You mockingly recounted the core of the argument, but prefaced it with a whole load of absolute nonsense that never happened here.


----------



## jaquen

*LittleDeer* said:


> If written erotica is the same as porn, and just as addictive, why don't we have just as many posts on here per day by men claiming their spouse is rejecting them in favour of erotic novels?
> 
> I have seen a few posts from men saying such things, however I've seen hundreds of posts from women talking about how their husbands are addicted to porn, or that it's harming their marriages. Weird


It's called a societal double standard. Women aren't conditioned any longer to believe that their versions of porn, and methods of masturbation, have any potential negative side effects on them, or a relationship. So men don't often see problems, even if there is one staring them straight in their face.

This is why, even here at TAM, when a man finally did stop in and lament that his wife is choosing 50 Shades of Grey over having a sex life with him, he was told, by men and women, to just embrace her sexual awakening and use it to his advantage. He was floored, and only about two or three of us noted the AWFUL advice, and the clear hypocrisy. The man was crying out for help, and the people were siding with the erotic, going to such extremes as actually naming other erotic novels he should recommend to his refusing wife.


And how many untold millions of female refusers aren't sexing their husbands, but are riding that vibrator train weekly? Yet if a man admitted that he's not sleeping with his wife, but likes to masturbate frequently, it's off with his head.



*LittleDeer* said:


> And to draw the argument that erotic literature is just as harmful, you would have to first believe porn was harmful.
> 
> If you don't then please stop arguing about something you have no real grasp on.


Now you're the expert on what people can "grasp"? Really?

Which is interesting, considering you've totally missed the point yourself. Most of the people who debate with you have already admitted readily that porn indeed does have the potential to be very harmful. I can even note negative side effects in my own life, and when I need to drop the porn for a season in order to remedy these things. I guess you missed all those posts?





*LittleDeer* said:


> We can all care about many things at one time, feel free to stop justifying yourselves with this argument and open up threads about those issues if you choose. Saying lots people hurt people every day, so I am too, and and I'll justify it by pointing the finger else where just doesn't cut it. JMO


And you still don't get it.

Who is "justifying" themselves to you, or anyone here? I don't even have to "justify" myself to my own wife on this topic. Perhaps some men are, but speaking for myself, who brought up the exploitation examples, I find it absolutely hilarious that you believe I am in "justification" mode. What a joke.


----------



## jaquen

Thundarr said:


> I don't think as many women get addicted to erotica in a way that it affects the sex life as do men to porn. For one thing, most men like the idea of being dominant which is what seem prevelant with erotica. Women on the other hand don't like anal or facials so much which is pretty common in porn


But how do we know that there isn't actually a correlation between the ever increasing consumption of female erotica, and romance/sex novels, with the increasing sexlessness in the American marriage?

I think that's what some of the professionals featured in the articles I posted are trying to ascertain. Could far more women be addicted to their erotica than we think, and could this be having a detrimental effect on their sex lives and we're just not conditioned to actually notice this problem?

The same goes with vibrators. How many women do, truthfully, come to enjoy their private time alone, with their ever ready Hitachi wands and never ending rabbits, over their husbands?



Thundarr said:


> If men read erotica and women watched porn then things would flip upside down and erotica would seem more harmful.


But the latest studies are showing that women are consuming a lot of visual porn.

They just talk about it less, and the general myth that porn is a male only world, with very few female viewers, continues to be perpetuated despite mounting evidence to the contrary.

So women actually are, on the whole, partaking in a wider variety of erotic material than men. There are the leading buyers of sex toys, the leading consumers of written erotica, and are catching up with men on the visual porn front.

But yet men continue to be the large scapegoat, while women go largely unchecked.


----------



## Caribbean Man

jaquen said:


> But how do we know that there isn't actually a correlation between the ever increasing consumption of female erotica, and romance/sex novels, with the increasing sexlessness in the American marriage?


:iagree:

Interesting point.
Research has not established that link as yet, but based on anecdotal evidence, such a link is very likely.
The reasons are shockingly simple.

1] There is higher demand than ever for female written erotica.

2] By far the largest consumer of sex toys is and has always been female.

As a side note,
There is also an increasing group of female consumers of pornography. This has led the major players in the porn business to market a package more suited for women and couples that has never existed before.


----------



## always_alone

Caribbean Man said:


> Nobody's pointing fingers elsewhere. The " problems " with pornography starts with the actors themselves and ends with the actors themselves.
> Not with you neither me.
> To say otherwise is shifting personal responsibility from those who choose to sell their bodies for a " mess of pottage " to John. Q. Public.
> I think that's called " blameshifting."



Yes people are free to do what they want with their bodies. Some even choose to do things that are illegal -- 

But this doesn't mean they shouldn't be encouraged to reflect ont

A). Why they choose to do these things
B) what social and cultural pressures and factors help construct these choices, what opportunities are available to men and women, and what roles and opportunities they are encouraged to fill
C) how it has come to pass that young girls and boys think it's such a great idea to post nude pics of themselves on the internet, and the fact that some of these "choices" aren't very good ones (witness Amanda Todd)
D) the fact that sometimes these are "choices" only in the loosest sense of the word -- and sometimes not even then
E) the stereotypes and myths that we are perpetuating, and the awful and limiting views we impose

I think it is grand that sex trade workers are starting to band together to fight for safe working conditions, protection and empowerment. But there is a long road to travel..


----------



## always_alone

Thundarr said:


> I do think porn is more often harmful than erotica *but only due to the audience* and not the content. If men read erotica and women watched porn then things would flip upside down and erotica would seem more harmful.


This is interesting -- and possibly more man-hating than anything I've come out with. Why will men necessarily have the more harmful habits? Do they all just want to dominate to the exclusion of healthy relationships?

Me, I don't think porn or erotica is harmful depending on who uses it. I think it is in what is depicted, what functions that depiction serves, and the social and personal context it exists in

Most porn is entirely male POV, and most of it depicts women as subservient, uni-dimensional creatures who exist solely to cater to male desire. In turn, men seem to thoroughly love and embrace this idea, to the point where they seek to recreate it everywhere, and even get cross with their human partners if they fail to live up to this ideal.

FWIW, I think the women who do this to their male partners are equally troubled.


----------



## always_alone

jaquen said:


> Then I can see the source of our conflict. We are looking at the world from two totally different feeds. Because what you stated above in the underlined portion I do not believe to be remotely a true reflection of the "bulk" of anything you've received here on TAM, in any form, or fashion. You mockingly recounted the core of the argument, but prefaced it with a whole load of absolute nonsense that never happened here.


It is true: I did receive some very supportive and concerned comments, for which I am grateful. And I did read some very interesting perspectives that I hadn't thought of before --and I am also grateful for these.

But I was not mocking when I said what did. A huge number of responses to my threads and otherwise who have challenged porn have been as follows:
-Men, like it and want to do it. You can't stop them
-You have no right to challenge what others want to do.
-f he is watching porn, then you should sleep with him more, wear more lingerie, or he more interesting in bed
-The problem isn't porn, it's your H. Porn is thing, so it can't possibly be the issue

And while I have seen you admit that some people may occasionally have a problem with porn, I've never seen you even hint that you might too, and occasionally stay away because of it

If this is the case, why can't men respond to the criticisms of porn with a simple, "you're right, porn can become compulsive and interfere with relationships. Here's some constructive tips about how to get back on course ..." -- instead of the angry attacks of how repressed, prudish, controlling and lacking in insight that I am?


----------



## Thundarr

always_alone said:


> This is interesting -- and possibly more man-hating than anything I've come out with.


I suppose it could sound like man hating. I'm a man and I certainly don't hate us (men) but we do seem less responsible with our habits in general.


----------



## jaquen

always_alone said:


> Most porn is entirely male POV, and most of it depicts women as subservient, uni-dimensional creatures who exist solely to cater to male desire. In turn, men seem to thoroughly love and embrace this idea, to the point where they seek to recreate it everywhere, and even get cross with their human partners if they fail to live up to this ideal.


This sounds like almost the entirety of human history.

Again, blameshifting, and scapegoating, on modern porn.

Men have never needed videos of barely legal nymphettes being stuffed with wall to wall co*cks in order to marginalize, and subjugate, women.

There is very little innovative about modern porn. It is a business that caters to trends, it does not create them. The fantasies were already in the minds of men long before the modern porn age commenced.

At the heart, you have a problem with the male sex, period.


----------



## jaquen

always_alone said:


> And while I have seen you admit that some people may occasionally have a problem with porn, I've never seen you even hint that you might too, and occasionally stay away because of it
> 
> If this is the case, why can't men respond to the criticisms of porn with a simple, "you're right, porn can become compulsive and interfere with relationships. Here's some constructive tips about how to get back on course ..." -- instead of the angry attacks of how repressed, prudish, controlling and lacking in insight that I am?


Note that you got here relatively recently. You are not aware of every single post I, or any other person you've disagreed with, had made on this topic.

Note also that, again, the conversations you have largely engaged of have consisted of a handful of mostly women coming strong with an anti-porn agenda, and challenging the men (and barely the women) who watch it. The responses have been largely centered around the right to watch porn, not the porn itself.

If you'd like to elicit a different response, try a different approach. Nothing about the way you've approached this topic so far lends itself well to healthy debate about porn itself. You are too busy stigmatizing men, perpetuating stereotypes, misrepresenting the men of TAM, and coming off as generally antagonistic, and very anti-male.


----------



## always_alone

jaquen said:


> At the heart, you have a problem with the male sex, period.


Wow. Really? That's it then? Men just want to subjugate women and treat them as sex objects? And porn is just a reflection of that?

Thanks for finally clearing that up for me. Silly me for thinking they might have other values -- or any respect at all for women as people..


----------



## jaquen

always_alone said:


> Wow. Really? That's it then? Men just want to subjugate women and treat them as sex objects? And porn is just a reflection of that?
> 
> Thanks for finally clearing that up for me. Silly me for thinking they might have other values -- or any respect at all for women as people..


You missed the point.

The perspectives you were attributing to porn have existed long before the advent of mainstream porn. You said earlier:

_Most porn is entirely male POV, and most of it depicts women as subservient, uni-dimensional creatures who exist solely to cater to male desire.* In turn, men seem to thoroughly love and embrace this idea, to the point where they seek to recreate it everywhere...*_

There is no "in turn". Women have been "depicted" as subservient, and uni-dimensional, for thousands of years, across countless societies, long before mainstream video porn came tripping along. So to suggest that men (in general, not every specific man) are NOW, as a reaction to porn, treating women like this is perpetuating a falsehood.

You have a problem with the historical, and unfortunate, subjection of women by men. But instead of striking to the heart of the matter, you're too occupied with blaming pornography.

The depictions you note in porn are the byproduct of this mentality, not the root of it.


----------



## always_alone

jaquen said:


> You missed the point.
> ...
> 
> You have a problem with the historical, and unfortunate, subjection of women by men. But instead of striking to the heart of the matter, you're too occupied with blaming pornography.
> 
> The depictions you note in porn are the byproduct of this mentality, not the root of it.


Art imitates life, but life also imitates art. Women may have had submissive fantasies before 50 Shades, but the book still perpetuates certain stereotypes and fantasies that really oughta be scrutinized on occasion. Same with porn. Young people are using it as de facto sex education and bringing this crap into their relationships, expecting real people to respond the same way.

And yes, I am aware of history, but historical porn does not at all compare to what is being made today. Not even in the same league. Not the same purpose, and not the same context.

And women have fought hard against the subjugations of history, and can now vote, work, and make choices. But there is still a long ways to go. Why shouldn't some of us continue to object to practices and products in our society that are perpetuating, even glorifying, our objectification? 

You keep saying that I am blame shifting, but I don't see porn as just this inert thing lying around society. It is a huge industry with the sole aim of exploiting human desire for profit. This involves inculcating desire, not just reflecting it.


----------



## always_alone

jaquen said:


> Women have been "depicted" as subservient, and uni-dimensional, for thousands of years, across countless societies, long before mainstream video porn came tripping along.


This isn't quite true, BTW. Many early depictions were very different from mainstream porn.


----------



## jaquen

always_alone said:


> And yes, I am aware of history, but historical porn does not at all compare to what is being made today. Not even in the same league. Not the same purpose, and not the same context.


"Historical porn" isn't mentioned anywhere in my post. In fact I went out of the way to clarify that we were talking about modern, mainstream porn.

You are not listening. You have a generic anti-porn argument that you pull out as rebuttal, and aren't even bothering to comprehend what people are actually saying anymore.



always_alone said:


> This isn't quite true, BTW. Many early depictions were very different from mainstream porn.


Again, let me repeat:

_Women have been "depicted" as subservient, and uni-dimensional, for thousands of years, *across countless societies*, long before mainstream video porn came tripping along.
_

Where in that statement did I say that women were depicted universally the same in every single society?

What we have here, as usual, is a failure to communicate.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

always_alone said:


> why can't men respond to the criticisms of porn with a simple, "you're right, porn can become compulsive and interfere with relationships. Here's some constructive tips about how to get back on course ..." -- instead of the angry attacks of how repressed, prudish, controlling and lacking in insight that I am?


Because its not uncommon that attacks on porn originate in a woman's own insecurity, desire to be the ONLY thing that hubs gets his jollies from (let's talk about controlling?), and an unrealistic expectation/understanding of male sexuality.

We look at women. Always have, always will. You might as well ask us to stop growing hair on our faces. Take away porn and guys will be spanking it in the shower to images in our heads... maybe they'll be about you, maybe they'll be images of the 20 yr old Starbucks barrista or waitress they saw today... or that quick glance up a skirt they got when that woman got out of her car. Good luck regulating our thoughts. 

There are men who are compulsive and choose porn over their wives. It can cause problems, but the problem is the man, not the porn. A highly insecure woman is just as problematic to a couple's sex life imo.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

always_alone said:


> Wow. Really? That's it then? Men just want to subjugate women and treat them as sex objects? And porn is just a reflection of that?
> 
> Thanks for finally clearing that up for me. Silly me for thinking they might have other values -- or any respect at all for women as people..


Subjugate: no. Objectify: yes. And most women want such objectification as much as men do or you wouldn't be going to such great lengths to pretty up and show skin, in spite of being uncomfortable (mini skirts in winter? I've seen 'em; high heels?) A guy who exhibits such characteristics of excessive grooming is thought to be a pretentious douche. The means by which sexual attraction occurs for men and women is very different.

Your view is a charicature. An overeaching feminazi view that ignores basic characteristics of being male and female. Men and women ARE NOT equal in every sense. We are NOT the same. Men DO objectify women sexually. To say that is wrong is to say that its wrong to be a man. Its a basic part of our desire for a woman. We think "I want that body"... we don't go "I bet she's a wonderful person." We desire true intimacy at a higher level too... but our carnal sex drive, at its most BASE, primal brain level, is objectifying. "Look at that @ss", I'm going to TAKE it.

It is in our nature to be dominant. It is female in nature to be submissive. Women generally aren't even attracted to submissive men. Its true among most mammals and is an evolutionary trait. This is NOT the same as subjugation as it appears to the hyper feminist. Respect for women as people is entirely independent of our physical desire for the female body. We ALL objectify women first. Psychologically healthy males WILL seek a dominant position over you even in completely respectful, true partnerships. These are UNIVERSAL traits of MEN. Whether the man has respect for you is a higher cognitive decision that differentiates a good person from a bad one. And chances are, if he has no real respect for women, he has no respect for other people in general. He is sociopathic and everyone is a means to his ends.

Enjoying watching porn is in no way a form of disrespect to women. Most men aren't even into the humiliation type genres of porn... but the idea that those who are must be horrible for doing so is like saying people are wannabe serial killers because they enjoy watching horror movies. Seriously?


----------



## TCSRedhead

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Subjugate: no. Objectify: yes. And most women want such objectification as much as men do or you wouldn't be going to such great lengths to pretty up and show skin, in spite of being uncomfortable (mini skirts in winter? I've seen 'em; high heels?) A guy who exhibits such characteristics of excessive grooming is thought to be a pretentious douche. The means by which sexual attraction occurs for men and women is very different.
> 
> Your view is a charicature. An overeaching feminazi view that ignores basic characteristics of being male and female. Men and women ARE NOT equal in every sense. We are NOT the same. Men DO objectify women sexually. To say that is wrong is to say that its wrong to be a man. Its a basic part of our desire for a woman. We think "I want that body"... we don't go "I bet she's a wonderful person." We desire true intimacy at a higher level too... but our carnal sex drive, at its most BASE, primal brain level, is objectifying. "Look at that @ss", I'm going to TAKE it.
> 
> It is in our nature to be dominant. It is female in nature to be submissive. Women generally aren't even attracted to submissive men. Its true among most mammals and is an evolutionary trait. This is NOT the same as subjugation as it appears to the hyper feminist. Respect for women as people is entirely independent of our physical desire for the female body. We ALL objectify women first. Psychologically healthy males WILL seek a dominant position over you. These are UNIVERSAL traits. Whether the man has respect for you is a higher cognitive decision that differentiates a good person from a bad one. And chances are, if he has no real respect for women, he has no respect for other people in general. He is sociopathic and everyone is a means to his ends.
> 
> Enjoying watching porn is in no way a form of disrespect to women. Most men aren't even into the humiliation type genres of porn... but the idea that those who are must be horrible for doing so is like saying people are wannabe serial killers because they enjoy watching horror movies. Seriously?


I definitely would agree with this - most women do want a man who is assertive and not the meek/mild personality (think Superman vs. Clark Kent). 

While hubby doesn't like porn and finds it cheesy in most forms, I never find that his reading Playboy or EasyRider to be disrespectful or degrading. 

I know that my husband appreciates my intellect and opinions but to be honest, I find it sexiest when he makes a comment about how hot I look or how he can't wait to get me to himself.


----------



## TCSRedhead

But to the OP's original post about the book series - it's not really porn per se. The protagonist meets a man who does objectify women and then 'saves' him in the end and creates a loving relationship. There just happens to be some kinky and fun sex along the way.


----------



## ocotillo

always_alone said:


> Don't think it's quite that simple. Something like 50 Shades definitely qualifies, but I wouldn't say that therefore every movie and book with a sex scene in it is pornographic.


With deep respect, literary classifications are not exactly the same thing as word definitions 

For example, the original hardback edition of Tom Clancy's _The Sum Of All Fears_ was 798 pages. 3-1/2 of those pages depicted an evening of explicit make-up sex between the protagonists Jack and Cathy Ryan.

The book is not going to fall into the genre of erotic fiction based on less that 1/2 of 1% of its content. The book is rightly classified as a techno thriller and the sex is arguably not even a plot element at all. 

_Fifty Shades Of Grey_ is classified as erotic fiction not only because a much higher percentage of its content is pornographic, but because the sexual encounters between the two principle protagonists are a major part of the story.

If it helps, I do agree with you at a personal level that pornography can be harmful to a relationship and my wife and I have agreed that it won't come into the house unless it's something entirely incidental. 

The reason accuracy on the subject is important to me is because my youngest is still living at home and working on a Master's in Art History. There are extended family members who view this as institutionalized porn and it's a real bone of contention.


----------



## always_alone

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Subjugate: no. Objectify: yes. And most women want such objectification as much as men do or you wouldn't be going to such great lengths to pretty up and show skin, in spite of being uncomfortable (mini skirts in winter? I've seen 'em; high heels?) A guy who exhibits such characteristics of excessive grooming is thought to be a pretentious douche. The means by which sexual attraction occurs for men and women is very different.
> 
> Your view is a charicature. An overeaching feminazi view that ignores basic characteristics of being male and female. Men and women ARE NOT equal in every sense. We are NOT the same. Men DO objectify women sexually. To say that is wrong is to say that its wrong to be a man. Its a basic part of our desire for a woman. We think "I want that body"... we don't go "I bet she's a wonderful person." We desire true intimacy at a higher level too... but our carnal sex drive, at its most BASE, primal brain level, is objectifying. "Look at that @ss", I'm going to TAKE it.
> 
> It is in our nature to be dominant. It is female in nature to be submissive. Women generally aren't even attracted to submissive men. Its true among most mammals and is an evolutionary trait. This is NOT the same as subjugation as it appears to the hyper feminist. Respect for women as people is entirely independent of our physical desire for the female body. *We ALL objectify women first. Psychologically healthy males WILL seek a dominant position over you even in completely respectful, true partnerships. These are UNIVERSAL traits of MEN. *Whether the man has respect for you is a higher cognitive decision that differentiates a good person from a bad one. And chances are, if he has no real respect for women, he has no respect for other people in general. He is sociopathic and everyone is a means to his ends.
> 
> Enjoying watching porn is in no way a form of disrespect to women. Most men aren't even into the humiliation type genres of porn... but the idea that those who are must be horrible for doing so is like saying people are wannabe serial killers because they enjoy watching horror movies. Seriously?


Oh my. Wow. I guess I must be anti-male after all. It's odd, I've had male friends, even sometimes get along better with men than women. But this is just astounding to me. The first instinct is to objectify and dominate? And this isn't a sign of disrespect?

Dear me. I don't belong in a relationship at all. I may not even belong on this planet. But thanks for clearing that up for me. I always wondered why I so often felt like prey rather than a person. Now I know.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

You're welcome. With no disrespect intended, I think you have an excessively feminist ideal drawn over your perceptions of male/female relations and little to no understanding or respect for healthy masculinity.

Dominance and objectification are dirty words for you.

In truth, dominance is a sorting mechanism for genetic and survival quality. The dominant male ensures security and this is the most fundemental of needs beyond food itself. Its no surprise that its generally attractive.


----------



## jaquen

TCSRedhead said:


> But to the OP's original post about the book series - it's not really porn per se. The protagonist meets a man who does objectify women and then 'saves' him in the end and creates a loving relationship. There just happens to be some kinky and fun sex along the way.


Sounds like Debbie Does Dallas, or any other longer length porn that uses a flimsy plot as connective tissue to marry the myriad sex scenes.

50 Shades isn't wetting panties all over the world because it's not porn. Nobody is reading it for the brilliant writing style, or the hefty plot.


----------



## jaquen

always_alone said:


> Oh my. Wow. I guess I must be anti-male after all. It's odd, I've had male friends, even sometimes get along better with men than women. But this is just astounding to me. The first instinct is to objectify and dominate? And this isn't a sign of disrespect?
> 
> Dear me. I don't belong in a relationship at all. I may not even belong on this planet. But thanks for clearing that up for me. I always wondered why I so often felt like prey rather than a person. Now I know.


Hence why I once recommended you seek a life of singlehood, or a lesbian relationship (and even then you'd run into a lot of Lesbian women whose instinct is to dominate). 

All along you have exhibited a glaringly obvious, fundamental problem with _maleness_, period.


----------



## TCSRedhead

jaquen said:


> Sounds like Debbie Does Dallas, or any other longer length porn that uses a flimsy plot as connective tissue to marry the myriad sex scenes.
> 
> 50 Shades isn't wetting panties all over the world because it's not porn. Nobody is reading it for the brilliant writing style, or the hefty plot.


I respectfully disagree, having read all three of them. It's not any more erotic or sexual than most of the popular fiction. To be honest, if you were looking just for sexual content, there's a heck of a lot more out there that is more porn-like (straight to the sex content with little to no plot). 

My belief as to the popularity is that it made it more mainstream to push the boundaries in the bedroom by introducing some restraints, blindfolds and sex toys. 

If they're loanable via Kindle (not sure if the publisher allows), I'd be happy to loan my copy to someone to check it out and then loan them a true 'erotic fiction' book to compare and see what I mean.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

TCSRedhead said:


> I respectfully disagree, having read all three of them. It's not any more erotic or sexual than most of the popular fiction. To be honest, if you were looking just for sexual content, there's a heck of a lot more out there that is more porn-like (straight to the sex content with little to no plot).
> 
> My belief as to the popularity is that it made it more mainstream to push the boundaries in the bedroom by introducing some restraints, blindfolds and sex toys.


I agree with you as to the reasons for its popularity, but I disagree on it not being porn simply because there exist more explicit content in other novels.

This is similar to drawing a distinction between softcore porn vs hardcore porn imo. The purpose of the book is to titilate areas of sexual interest/desire to women, which generally means a heavy dose of relationship dynamic in addition to the actual sex. Mr. Grey is a sexually charged fantasy.

My biggest complaint with the anti-porn brigade is over the notion that porn or even erotic novels lead to unrealistic expectations of reality. The whole reason these things ARE titilating is that they ARE unrealistic, only realistic enough to suspend sheer disbelief and absurdity. Such a case can be made against virtually all fiction. The Notebook for example, is one of the most popular books and movies among women. The male protagonist writes his counterpart every day they are apart for like a year. Does that create an reasonable expectation that any good man should write his woman every day they are apart?

No. Its hyperbole that feeds a base desire to be THAT obsessively loved.

In real life, the guy writing daily letters is kinda dependent or needy (for lack of a better description). What works in fiction, does not always translate to real life. An alternate depiction of the same actions could be made to seem downright creepy. That's WHY we create it, and why we enjoy it. We can momentarily escape limitations of reality. That doesn't mean we reject reality or dictate that our reality match the fiction.

The real problem isn't the fiction. It lies in the minds of people who cannot maintain the difference, or come to compulsively rely on it.


----------



## ocotillo

TCSRedhead said:


> I respectfully disagree, having read all three of them. It's not any more erotic or sexual than most of the popular fiction.


I've read the first one, but only skimmed the others. They weren't erotic to me at all. And in fairness to James they weren't intended to appeal to a male reader. Murderous rage was the strongest emotion I felt.

But personal reactions are entirely subjective. Words like, pornography are defined as objectively as they possibly can be because the whole purpose of a dictionary is to keep us all on the same page.

Was _Fifty Shades_ pornographic? The pornographic parts were


----------



## always_alone

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> Dominance and objectification are dirty words for you.


Yes, it's true. I do not want to be dominated at all by anyone. And the thought that my SO or any other guy, for that matter, might look at me and think 'I want to take that piece of a$$' just makes me feel utterly disrespected and alone.

Sigh. I just want to crawl into a hole now.


----------



## jaquen

TCSRedhead said:


> I respectfully disagree, having read all three of them. It's not any more erotic or sexual than most of the popular fiction. To be honest, if you were looking just for sexual content, there's a heck of a lot more out there that is more porn-like (straight to the sex content with little to no plot).




That's like saying that late night, soft core Skinemax flicks aren't really porn because they have more plot, and less explicit sex, than the hardcore porn.


----------



## Caribbean Man

DvlsAdvc8 said:


> You're welcome. With no disrespect intended, I think you have an excessively feminist ideal drawn over your perceptions of male/female relations and little to no understanding or respect for healthy masculinity.
> 
> Dominance and objectification are dirty words for you.
> 
> In truth, dominance is a sorting mechanism for genetic and survival quality. The dominant male ensures security and this is the most fundemental of needs beyond food itself. Its no surprise that its generally attractive.


:iagree:

Most females are naturally attracted to male dominance. That's why men are usually the instigators and initiators of sex.
The act of sex itself is one of dominance.
A lot of females have dominance type of fantasies. But,they don't want to be dominated by just any man , so they themselves have a part to play. They must first surrender.

This sexual dominance is not to be confused with the type of dominance that causes fear and other negative emotional responses.
This dominance is what builds sexual tension and attraction .
There is a difference.


----------



## ocotillo

always_alone said:


> Yes, it's true. I do not want to be dominated at all by anyone. And the thought that my SO or any other guy, for that matter, might look at me and think 'I want to take that piece of a$$' just makes me feel utterly disrespected and alone.
> 
> Sigh. I just want to crawl into a hole now.



Objectification theory posits that girls and women are, "typically acculturated to internalize an observer's perspective as a primary view of their physical selves." This in turn can lead to an array of mental health risks that disproportionately affect women. Nobody thinks that's a good thing.

But the term has been bastardized into a condemnation of the male gender and the nature of male sexual arousal itself and I think you're probably seeing a little hyperbole here as a result.


----------



## TCSRedhead

I think there's a lot of negative emotion for some of the posters around the word 'dominance'. It's not a negative thing in a healthy relationship. 

For me, my husband cannot dominate me if I do not submit. As a good wife, I do submit to him in most matters. As a respectful husband, he considers my needs before making decisions in his role as the leader in our marriage.

As for sexually, yes, I do like him to take the lead and initiate and 'dominate' and in turn, there are times I like to be that initiator! I find it very stimulating to have him the the strong manly man type! 
As to whether 50 shades is porn - not in my opinion but that's my two cents. I would have read the story line for sheer entertainment without the sex.


----------



## Caribbean Man

always_alone said:


> Yes, it's true. * I do not want to be dominated at all by anyone. And the thought that my SO or any other guy, for that matter, might look at me and think 'I want to take that piece of a$$' just makes me feel utterly disrespected and alone.
> *
> Sigh. I just want to crawl into a hole now.


The type of dominance you are referring to is different to what the poster is talking about.
Maybe i can give an example. It's comparable to saying that men are naturally competitive.
When you got married, your husband beat out all the other men to win your approval. The reason you approved of him and not the others was because of his " _dominance_ " over them.


----------



## Thundarr

always_alone said:


> Sigh. I just want to crawl into a hole now.


Life will get better AA. You are on TAM afterall expressing yourself, venting, learning, teaching, etc.


----------



## life and strife

I thought i got boring really quickly, and was very poorly written.The female lead is not believable as she is stupidly naive.Just my opinion


----------



## always_alone

ocotillo said:


> Murderous rage was the strongest emotion I felt.


Curious. Would love to hear your thoughts on what elicited this reaction.


----------



## ocotillo

always_alone said:


> Curious. Would love to hear your thoughts on what elicited this reaction.


Well I'm not a prude and have a pretty open mind. If a couple wants to indulge in that type of erotic role playing, it's their business.

But that's not really what's going on in these books. The Grey character as he's fleshed out over the course of the series is the fatherless son of a crack whȏre who was orphaned at four when his mother took her life in front of him. As a child, he's starved and physically abused by her pimp and as an adolescent, he's sexually abused and dominated by a female pedophile.

His sadistic streak is therefore not just an act. It's an outlet and manifestation of his own self-loathing and troubled past. In other words, it's the real damn thing and he's a textbook sociopath. This becomes even more obvious when you consider that he's not really attracted to women who are anywhere near a match for him, but to a weak, stumbling, inexperienced young virgin lacking in self confidence and therefore easy prey for a man like him. Sociopathy is not pretty in real life. These people can be dangerous predators and among their ranks are serial killers, rapists and pedophiles.

Yes I know it's just fiction and yes, I know that lots of women really, really liked the series. Decent men can feel pretty protective towards women though and the Grey character provoked a visceral reaction.


----------



## always_alone

ocotillo said:


> Yes I know it's just fiction and yes, I know that lots of women really, really liked the series. Decent men can feel pretty protective towards women though and the Grey character provoked a visceral reaction.


Interesting. I haven't read 50 shades, largely because I too find this sort of fantasy repulsive. 

And your reaction is not dissimilar to the way I respond to male-oriented porn: yes, I know it's just fantasy, and yes, I know that lots of men really, really like it. But decent women do like to know that they are appreciated for more than just being submissive sex objects, and pornographic depictions often provoke a visceral reaction -- in me at least. Not quite murderous rage, but definitely rage.


----------



## changednow

Confused42 said:


> Well Ladies if you get tired of your husband just start reading these books. You will really hate him then!!


First of all, I thought this was the ladies lounge. For sharing and support. I do not know why I am consistently reading posts from men in the ladies lounge, unless it is specifically asked for from the poster. And this specifically said "ladies"

2nd of all, the first book sucked. It was horribly written and the female lead is a mess. Not believable, not likable, not worth getting to know. After I read the 20something virgin had magic deepthroat powers on her first try I was done. It is not erotic, did not rev me up or do anything but disgust me. I am mad that I shelled out 15 bucks on my nook at the urging of my dumb ass female co-workers. For them it must have been racy, for me boring and the writing, did I mention it sucked?

The porn arguement, I don't know why it got here? refer to original post. But I find it funny, as in scary, the degree some people will go to defend porn. It wasn't even in the original posters comment. It said you will really hate your husband if you read the books. I took it to mean, wives would resent thier husbands for not beating the crap out of them, or it could have meant wives will think men are all jerks if they read the book. who knows? 

I don't know how to feel about porn. I dislike seeing women get gagged, you know what on their faces, and used in ways that I feel sick and degraded for them. I feel porn is what caused my husband to want anal sex so badly. I feel that is why he pretty much pushed me to try it. It is still not my favorite thing, I have liked it, but I can't do it like they do in the pornos, without prep work and going slowly, he always wants to do it like the porn depicts. He thinks I should just be gung ho, stick it right in there, no foreplay or nothing because we have done it many times before. I also think there is plenty of over-seas porn with girls and boys of legal age in their country, which can be pretty loosey goosey. Also, some of those sites, I can think of the one about the bus, where the woman has sex with a guy in a bus and then gets pushed out of the bus and left on the side of the road. I don't know many women who would be OK with that, unless on drugs, which I believe a lot are. I work with drug addicted felons, and the things they have done to women, also on drugs themselves, are horrible. Many of these girls start out as prostitutes or strippers with severe self esteem issues, not that many are working their way through law school. I think the porn culture is changing how our young girls are seeing themselves. I don't know many daddies out there that would find it OK to see their 18 year old daughter flashing her breasts and whatnots to the world on those girls gone crazy videos (i know what its really called) But our culture, not just porn of course, is really sexualizing girls at such an early age. I would like to hear intellegent arguements for those videos. i think daddies with daughters should think about viewing porn as advocating for it and in turn maybe just maybe helping our culture sexualize young girls in a round about way. 

I am sick of this websites anti-woman tone. I check back every once in a while thinking my mind will change about it, but no, something, which I will call God, shows me posts like this, with posts from men which totally turn me off. I came to this website for support with my marital problems. There have been some helpful posts and discussions. But mostly I see anti-woman discussions. I thought that I was just looking for it, but now, wow. I am not even safe to commiserate with women in the LADIES LOUNGE. The negativity against women is here too! Where is the sharing and support?


----------



## anony2

jaquen said:


> Hence why I once recommended you seek a life of singlehood, or a lesbian relationship (*and even then you'd run into a lot of Lesbian women whose instinct is to dominate*).
> 
> All along you have exhibited a glaringly obvious, fundamental problem with _maleness_, period.



...I bet you like your soft wife? 

Steve Hughes: the "straightness" of gay men, and the "gayness" of straight men (CC) - YouTube

:rofl:


----------



## ShawnD

anony2 said:


> ...I bet you like your soft wife?
> 
> Steve Hughes: the "straightness" of gay men, and the "gayness" of straight men (CC) - YouTube
> 
> :rofl:


A gay friend once told me that straight people are the gayest people he knows. 
"Good football play" /smack on the butt
"He fell asleep so we put tiger balm on his balls!"
"He was drunk so we put a carrot in his ass!"

Right. You rubbed his balls and put something in his ass, but you're totally not gay? It's worth noting that gay people don't do weird gay things like that. They want your consent before they start putting things in your butt.


----------



## Phenix70

ShawnD said:


> A gay friend once told me that straight people are the gayest people he knows.
> "Good football play" /smack on the butt
> "He fell asleep so we put tiger balm on his balls!"
> "He was drunk so we put a carrot in his ass!"
> 
> Right. You rubbed his balls and put something in his ass, but you're totally not gay? It's worth noting that gay people don't do weird gay things like that. *They want your consent before they start putting things in your butt*.


Just spit out my tea all over my lap top, that was the post of the day. :smthumbup:


----------



## jaquen

changednow said:


> First of all, I thought this was the ladies lounge. For sharing and support. I do not know why I am consistently reading posts from men in the ladies lounge, unless it is specifically asked for from the poster. And this specifically said "ladies"


This is a public message board. Posters are free to post whereever they choose. At least half the posters in the Men's Clubhouse are women, even when the topic specifically addresses men.

You looking for enforced segregation? Start your own board, and enforce membership.



changednow said:


> I am sick of this websites anti-woman tone... But mostly I see anti-woman discussions. I thought that I was just looking for it, but now, wow. I am not even safe to commiserate with women in the LADIES LOUNGE. The negativity against women is here too! Where is the sharing and support?


You might want to stick around longer. A lot of the "anti-woman" tone you pick up are from men, and even some women, who get tired of the "men are bad, wrong, stupid" mentality that is so prevalent among women, and very strong here on TAM. If you think TAM doesn't have a very potent thread of male-bashing, you need to ask God to open your eyes to the other side of this. The very reason porn was even brought into this discussion is because every single time male designed porn/erotica, or even sometimes masturbation, is mentioned, the threads explode with a bunch of women wagging their finger judgmentally at men (very seldom at women who watch the same material), and yet whenever female designated porn/erotica, or masturbation, comes up the same judgement voices are interestingly silent.

Again, if you're looking for a more balanced view of what this site really looks like, spend a bit more time in the Men's Clubhouse, the Sex forum, or the General section.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

always_alone said:


> Yes, it's true. I do not want to be dominated at all by anyone. And the thought that my SO or any other guy, for that matter, might look at me and think 'I want to take that piece of a$$' just makes me feel utterly disrespected and alone.
> 
> Sigh. I just want to crawl into a hole now.


Where is your passion? You don't want a guy who's blood literally BOILS at the thought of touching you?

Get past what you perceive as crude language. Get past the mushy mushy. What I'm describing here is not disrespect or anything bad... its PASSION: I WANT HER.

Many guys would never say "I want to take that piece of a$$" because most have a higher layer of thinking that polishes our thoughts before they are verbalized (you can make a distinction of class here if you want), but trust me, that's the level of passionate intensity in ALL our minds. I WANT HER. GROWL. PRIMAL. I really think you're throwing away something pretty amazing and integral to the human experience. 

Whether you realize it or not, you are dominated and you dominate every single day of your life - we ALL are/do. You associate the term with undue negativity.

Most men happily line up behind a natural leader... a dominant man. We in fact LIKE to work for him, fight for him, respect him etc. Women generally seek the safety and assurance of a man more dominant than themselves. You want to know he will take care of things and you won't have to carry the load. You want to know he'll stand up for you.

Most women want a man who is decisive. A man who takes charge and knows what he's doing. I read an article this morning that contained the results of a survey of 3,000 women. One of the questions was if a woman would be less inclined to be interested in a guy she learned was a virgin. 60% said yes, and it makes perfect sense. Women want a dominant man... one who knows what he's doing and can lead them in bed. The overwhelming majority of women do NOT want to lead sexually - and this forum is overloaded with proof. Meanwhile, a woman's virginity is like a nifty treat to a guy. We get a special place no one else ever will. We get to lead someone into the world of sex and possibly set an early tone of how they view sex going forward. That's pretty awesome stuff.

Break your association of dominance with controlling.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

Ironically given the turn of discussion in this thread, dominance is one of the central sexually charged themes in 50 shades. Still I don't like Gray at all and agree with ocotillo.

The whole thing is really a mess. The only thing I can figure is that women like the idea of this super hot rich guy who could have anyone he wants being all about THEM; women have an insecurity about being naive and identify with Steele; the elements of dominance are a turn on... and its all wrapped up in a "she saves the messed up sociopath" story... she had an effect on him and was special.


----------



## DvlsAdvc8

changednow said:


> I am sick of this websites anti-woman tone. I check back every once in a while thinking my mind will change about it, but no, something, which I will call God, shows me posts like this, with posts from men which totally turn me off. I came to this website for support with my marital problems. There have been some helpful posts and discussions. But mostly I see anti-woman discussions. I thought that I was just looking for it, but now, wow. I am not even safe to commiserate with women in the LADIES LOUNGE. The negativity against women is here too! Where is the sharing and support?


Where is the attack on women? All I see is attacks on men and maleness.


----------



## StoneAngel

jaquen said:


> This is a public message board.
> 
> You might want to stick around longer. A lot of the "anti-woman" tone you pick up are from men, and even some women, who get tired of the "men are bad, wrong, stupid" mentality that is so prevalent among women, and very strong here on TAM. If you think TAM doesn't have a very potent thread of male-bashing,
> 
> 
> 
> *I am in no way a male hater, but if you want to talk about what is prevalent on TAM you have to address both sides...yes there are male-bashing threads.... just as equal are the number of threads which reduce women to nothing but sex objects and worthless unless making her man happy "putting out".l*
> 
> The very reason porn was even brought into this discussion is because every single time male designed porn/erotica, or even sometimes masturbation, is mentioned, the threads explode with a bunch of women wagging their finger judgmentally
> 
> *Although Ocotillo was very kind to give everyone the definition of pornography. This discussion goes around in circles for a couple of reasons. #1 as Ocotillo clarified for us all, 50 Shades is Pornography in it truest sense, however women define pornography as video and photos. We forget about The Marquis du Sod. This is because of the prevelance of video pornography. As I stated earlier video porn is different from literary porn much like a car is different from a bicycle, so instead of bastardizing both in a general term let them have there own distinction..and definition..because they are very different. #2 Why the distinction? As stated, one is fictous the other is real. This was argued as irrelovent earlier because the contentis the same. So I say to you read 50 Shades...there is BDSM, degradation, violence, control and graphic sexual scenes but fictious. Then go read the Karla Holmoka and Paul Bernardo story. BDSM, degradation, violence and graphic sexual scenes. This is the true story of the rape and murder of three beautiful teenagers. The fictious one may do something for me.....the true story put to paper does nothing for me (other than revolt me) although it contains all the elements that should by rights get me aroused (make my panties wet) if it were solely about content.
> 
> 
> In addition to it not only being about fiction vs reality, the Adult Film Industry has strong ties to Organized Crime. I don't know of any plublishing houses that do.
> 
> 
> Carribean man speak of "consent" in the Video Pornography world. Stats estimate that 90% of porn stars are heavily addicted to drugs and alcohol, their consent could be easily challenged in a court of law. He also speaks about government inspections which is laughable in itself. There is never enough inspectors for anything, building inspectors, food inspectors, border inspectors. That is why our food is safe with no Ecoli, and our water is not poluted and drugs don't come across the border, I am sure that Pornographic Video's are regularly inspected:rofl::rofl: Wikkipedia now there is a source for champions.
> 
> 
> An age law? I am sure Organized Crime looks to uphold the Law. When documentation can't be forged, these American Porn producers won't make a video with someone under age within the US borders, but they will pay someone in Thailand to make it there. After editing the video ends up back in the Americans hands free to distribute it consequence free.....so when it says Hot Young Asians, they are YOUNG Asians.
> 
> As one source for reference go to
> www.thepinkcross.org
> Here are some stats
> 36 porn stars died that we know of from HIV, suicide, homicide and drugs between 2007 and 2010.
> Over 100 straight and gay performers died from AIDS.
> 2,396 cases of Chlamydia and 1,389 cases of Gonorrhea reported among performers since 2004.
> 
> I don't think porn stars are consenting to this.
> 
> 
> 
> There is a wonderful documentary that the Fifth Estate or W5 did on the video porn industry (I will find it) on the level of brutallity that is on and of the camera. Broken jaws, vaginal tears, bleeding from the rectum many are denied medical attention and threatened if they were to go to the police. (this again has been stated before)
> Many women (myself included) can not reconcile their mate, their leader, and more importantly their Protector as having the ability to numb himself to the truth of the industry and the graphic violence on screen in order to gratify himself.
> 
> Ocotillo comments on the sadistic pathology of the lead male in Greys and is revolted by the vulgarity and yet there does not seem to be the same revulsion for the sadists who produce video pornograghy (those sadist are real) Please explain why?
> 
> Most of the men in this thread believe Porn is innocuous.
> visit Your Brain On Porn | Evolution has not prepared your brain for today's Internet porn . These are the opinions of men and supporting scientific proof of those opinions. Video Porn is anything but harmless.*
> 
> (very seldom at women who watch the same material), and yet whenever female designated porn/erotica, or masturbation, comes up the same judgement voices are interestingly silent.
> 
> *This may very well be the case, I don't know for certain I haven't read alot of threads in this same vein. Real or preceived it certainly has gotten under your skin*


*personally I think you owe Always Alone an apology. You may feel attacked by the prevalence of the stereotyped "bad man" on TAM but I don't believe she said anything to you that was personally insulting that warranted your "she should only look at a Lesbian relationship etc etc."

A woman could easily look at your posts with all the references to porn, the long list of titles you have given and make some pretty insulting comments about all your free time alone....but that would just be childish and rude.*


----------



## ocotillo

StoneAngel said:


> Octillio comments on the sadistic pathology of the lead male in Greys and is revolted by the vulgarity and yet there does not seem to be the same revulsion for the sadists who produce video pornograghy (those sadist are real) Please explain why?


I don't know if you specifically wanted a response but speaking personally, I'm not terribly familiar with video pornography and have said several times that my wife and I have agreed it won't come into the house. Certainly I would feel the same outrage.

You might find it amusing to research Gary Wilson a little bit. He makes some good points in the video you linked to, but his ideas don't stop there. They extend into marriage and marital sex itself in the form of tantric sex / karezza / semen retention new age psychobabble...


----------



## Lyris

I have not read this series and after reading the excerpts in this thread, I never ever will.

I don't want to be dominated, controlled, *hit*. No thanks. Not sexy.


----------



## StoneAngel

ocotillo said:


> I don't know if you specifically wanted a response but speaking personally, I'm not terribly familiar with video pornography and have said several times that my wife and I have agreed it won't come into the house. Certainly I would feel the same outrage.
> 
> You might find it amusing to research Gary Wilson a little bit. He makes some good points in the video you linked to, but his ideas don't stop there. They extend into marriage and marital sex itself in the form of tantric sex / karezza / semen retention new age psychobabble...


Of course I wanted you to answer. I am glad that you would have the same sense of outrage for both mediums. You and your wife are very fortunate to find common ground on such a hot button topic.

Thanks for clarifying the definition of Porn, although it does subdivide this debate further, it does clarify. You sound like a very clever man and you can keep giving me English lessons whenever you see fit.  
I'll check out Gary Wilson more closely, but I wasn't meaning to link just to the video but the full website. I don't usually like looking at things in snap shots. The full website has depth. 
If he turns out to be alot like David Deida I may have to shoot myself.


----------



## jaquen

StoneAngel said:


> personally I think you owe Always Alone an apology. You may feel attacked by the prevalence of the stereotyped "bad man" on TAM but I don't believe she said anything to you that was personally insulting that warranted your "she should only look at a Lesbian relationship etc etc."


There is a whole, on going conversation between Always Alone, and I, on this topic. It does not involve you, and you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. If this grown woman feels she needs an apology, it's up to her to ask. Your view on the matter is of zero consequence to me.



StoneAngel said:


> A woman could easily look at your posts with all the references to porn, the long list of titles you have given


What on God's beautiful green earth are you talking about? What "long list of titles"? What "references to porn"? I think you might have me confused with another person. 



StoneAngel said:


> and make some pretty insulting comments about all your free time alone


And how would a single person here know how much free time I do, or do not have, nevermind how much of that time is spent alone?

*Hint, my wife is sitting right here as I type to you. 



StoneAngel said:


> ...but that would just be childish and rude.


They would be welcome too. It just as I would be welcome to not give two, good, healthy phucks.

At this point this conversation with you has clearly taken a turn into the Twilight Zone. I'll let you, and Mr. Serling, enjoy your journey.


----------



## EnjoliWoman

O.M.G. This is STILL going on????

It's a BOOK people. Fiction. A speculation (in my opinion) as to what drives someone to like that lifestyle. I'm sure not everyone who likes the lifestyle had a crack ***** mother and was sexually abused.

I don't recall him hitting her - I do recall light tickles and smacks with a whip in a sexual setting as well as spanking.

It's poorly written, it's sort of interesting at times. Let's not over-analyze a sexy, odd bit of pop literature.


----------



## Enchanted

EnjoliWoman said:


> O.M.G. This is STILL going on????
> 
> It's a BOOK people. Fiction. A speculation (in my opinion) as to what drives someone to like that lifestyle. I'm sure not everyone who likes the lifestyle had a crack ***** mother and was sexually abused.
> 
> I don't recall him hitting her - I do recall light tickles and smacks with a whip in a sexual setting as well as spanking.
> 
> It's poorly written, it's sort of interesting at times. Let's not over-analyze a sexy, odd bit of pop literature.


LOL!

I wish I wrote that poorly written trilogy. The freaking author made a fortune.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Enchanted said:


> LOL!
> 
> I wish I wrote that poorly written trilogy. The freaking author made a fortune.



Ha ha!

And that's the purpose behind all the controversy around the book.
Its just a marketing tool .

Strictly business , " _nothing personal_."


----------



## Enchanted

Caribbean Man said:


> Ha ha!
> 
> And that's the purpose behind all the controversy around the book.
> Its just a marketing tool .
> 
> Strictly business , " _nothing personal_."


----------

