Thursday, 6 September 2012

Generation XXX: Teens Addicted to Porn?

quote [ Teens who say they were addicted to online pornography share their secrets ]

That ABC would produce this segment simply stunned me. There is not a more certain way to make teens act out later in life in dangerous and bizarre ways than to suppress their early sexual development or make it seem dirty. Something is very wrong here. Few porn links in extended.

http://womennextdoor.tumblr.com/

http://tumblr.cameltoe-mccougar.com/

http://redsnapper921.tumblr.com/

http://db4dh.tumblr.com/page/4

http://completelyhornypics.tumblr.com/

http://nudestagram.com/category/instagr-am/

Also follow the various links *within* those links.
[by maryyugo@6:33pmGMT] [+9 Interesting]

Comments

spazm said @ 7:25pm GMT on 6th Sep [Score:3 Insightful]
Teens who say they were addicted to online pornography share their secrets

I for one think "their secrets" are rather disappointing and brought me no new porn whatsoever. Can anyone invite those guys to SE for a little edumacation?
graham said @ 11:03pm GMT on 6th Sep [Score:2 Insightful]
Somebody should have posted some in their post...
maryyugo said @ 11:37pm GMT on 6th Sep [Score:1 Informative]
OK. I added some porn links to the extended. They lead to more if you do a bit of looking. Also, there's a new term "sextragram" which leads to some interesting imagery if you Google it.
maryyugo said @ 6:34pm GMT on 7th Sep
That term should have been sextagram, not sextRagram.
oxyrosis said @ 7:44pm GMT on 6th Sep
wont load for me.

i even disabled ad blocker
maryyugo said @ 7:47pm GMT on 6th Sep
Hmmm... maybe try Chrome? Or a proxyserver?

http://anonymouse.org/

I just tried it and it works fine here in SW USA.
oxyrosis said @ 7:53pm GMT on 6th Sep
naw, i'll just IMAGINE the insanity.

i dont watch TV, i think i'll avoid this version of the news too.
mechanical contrivance said @ 1:41am GMT on 7th Sep
The only reason to watch the news is to stay informed about what old people are being told.
iosef said @ 8:08pm GMT on 6th Sep
IMO what these people are experiencing is just as much about cognitive dissonance as it is addiction. of course it's possible to consume too much porn but it only becomes a problem when it severely harms or clashes with one's self-image.
conception said @ 8:53pm GMT on 6th Sep [Score:1 Insightful]
I think that sorta depends on what you think a problem is. Porn, I think, can be sort of like TV... too easy of stimulation for the brain. So, you get "addicted" to the easy stimulation and choose it over more potentially fulfilling in the long term activities.
krimz said @ 9:08pm GMT on 6th Sep
"it only becomes a problem when it severely harms or clashes with one's self-image" ...or if you start thinking that women enjoy having their butt cheeks slapped during sex or that slapping them in the face with your dangling member is great foreplay.
kichijoii said @ 10:30pm GMT on 6th Sep
What are you trying to say? I met a woman who enjoyed those things. Hell, she suggested them!

Generalizing won't get you anywhere because people's tastes are more varied than you think. I think what you're going for is the idea that mainstream porn causes men to think the average woman enjoys behaviors that are actually more deviant, like cumming on her face or slapping her tits. However, I think this is easily managed by, you know, actually being with a woman, learning what she likes, and going with that. And if little Johnny really wants to cum on her face, they can negotiate that later.
krimz said @ 5:02am GMT on 7th Sep
I thought what I said was pretty straighforward? As already mentioned above most porn is about treating women as fuckdolls and if that's your idea of a healthy, sexual relationship someone will almost certainly end up disappointed.
dreamingzephyr said @ 5:48am GMT on 7th Sep [Score:2]
I end up disappointed when I'm not treated like a fuck doll.

But I suppose not everyone gets off on being objectified.
krimz said @ 6:47am GMT on 7th Sep
hence the added "almost".
slashbeast said @ 8:12pm GMT on 6th Sep [Score:1 Insightful]
I was kinda waiting for one of them to mention how often the looked at porn. I'd imagine all sympathy goes out the window when they try to make themselves seem a victim with a statement like: "It got so bad that i was looking at it every day!"
cb361 said @ 9:14pm GMT on 6th Sep [Score:1 Underrated]
The only difference between now and then is that then, I searched for porn that wasn't there, and now it's there. For me, porn was a constant uphill struggle. From the heady heights of school sex education (a film of a glassy eyed naked woman) I graduated to Police Academy and Airplane on VHS, before finally making the jump to soft porn skin-mags (what the hell are those things between her legs? I thought women only had internal genitalia). I didn't get my greasy hands on proper porn until after I had actually had proper sex.

Kids nowadays don't know they're born.
scojam said @ 9:44pm GMT on 6th Sep
Yes the good old days when you couldn't get porn unless you crossed the border into the USA and then you needed a projector. Sometimes the guys on the coffee truck sold the stuff but it was expensive. After years of never seeing the money shot I finally met a guy who had an endless supply of porn. He was an undercover drug guy and got the stuff from a friend in vice. I never asked what he traded for the movies.

The only other way you got to see porn was to run for office won in a year when the elected officials in Toronto were watching the stuff but only to decide if it now met the moral community standards and could be released to the public.
RhesusMonkey said @ 12:41am GMT on 8th Sep
I'm glad I didn't grow up in your Canada. In my pre-18 youth there were skin mags for sale in gas stations and an "Adult" section of the local video store. Then BlockBuster came in and fucked that all up, and then it was the "Adult" section of the Asian Grocer.

Oh, and BBSes before the Internet. Now - *Poof*; everywhere.
zarathustra said @ 9:27pm GMT on 6th Sep
I glanced at the web site of the advocacy group. There was no ( that I saw) studies to back up their assertions. All their unsourced "facts" and statistics had the typical correlation/causation problem - correlation of lonely people using porn - depressed people using porn, of course they imply the porn is the cause rather than the effect. Then on top of that the guy they call a psychotherapist is an L.S.W. - doesn't mean he can't be right, but it would be a bit more impressive with a doctor or at least a master. On the whole it sounds like religious people trying to push their social agenda under the guise of science. I'd be interested in seeing where their funding comes from.
puravida said @ 10:18pm GMT on 6th Sep [Score:4 Underrated]
Fuck it, I'll say it. I really think there's something to this. Honestly. And I know that on this site, that's practically blasphemy. And to be clear, I love porn. I have probably a terabyte of it sitting in my external HD, and I watch it almost daily. So please hear me out.

Let's be honest: here at SE, we have a healthy contempt for religion (which I'm FINE with). But if you consider the religious angle in the story a possible distraction from the real issue, I think there's possibly some real weight to the argument that pornograpy can become addicting.

Yes, I realize there's no evidence. Yet. But this is something really new, I'm talking VERY new. Like the last 10 or so years, maybe. At some point, porn has become ubiquitous, more so than my wildest adolescent dreams (I just turned 30). And you know what? I think it might be possible that we're simply not wired to handle this kind of access.

Can some more intelligent SE'rs help me out here? Do any of you recall this experiment where scientists were studying sexual selection on some species of fish? I think the males (maybe the females) had this big red dot on some part of their body, and the females were attracted to this red dot. The bigger the dot, the "sexier" the fish. The thing is, scientists created these fake "bombshell" fish that had ENORMOUS red dots, much bigger than was biologically possible. And guess what? The fish tried to mate with these biologically impossible fish, ignoring all the natural fish.

In another related study involving these birds that nested on beach sand, scientists noticed that if more than one egg rolled out of its nest, the bird would roll the eggs back to the nest in order of descending size. The bird would go after the largest egg, and then the slightly smaller one, and then so on. Makes total sense, right? Big egg = healthy bird, natural selection, etc. But scientists found when they placed these fake, impossible, foot-ball size eggs outside the nest, the birds tried to roll back these before any real eggs.

Stupid animals? No. They're just programmed to "mate with the biggest red-dot possible" or "roll the biggest egg, no matter what". There's no need to put a line of behavioral code that says "make sure the egg is a real egg first" because during it's evolutionary past, there were no scientists routinely trying to fool said birds. Make sense? These animals were not wired, have not evolved to "handle" fake, red-dotted fish and impossibly large eggs. Maladaptive behaviors is the result.

All I'm suggesting is that our "fapping mechanism", or whatever you want to call it, is poorly equipped to deal with the unlimited amount of pornography that is available today. And what sucks about sex addiction, like food addiction, is that it hijacks a biological process that is normally adaptive. Abstinence-only can work with gambling or heroin because you don't NEED those to live (biologically speaking). But addiction to FOOD? You can't tell a food addict to stop eating. They need to eat to live. And you certainly can't tell a 12-year old boy not to fap, for pretty much the same reason. That's why sex and food addiction is so damn messy.

I don't know what the answer is to "pornography addiction", or how to define it even, but I doubt it lies with some religious sexual abstinence. What I DO know is that I used to have to WORK for my porn. I had to scrounge, pick, steal, and go through all sorts of misadventures just to get a few tattered pages of titties. The work it took for me to get to my porn was a stopgap. A "rate-limiting" step, if you will.

I also know that even today I find myself at times spending WAY too much time watching porn, and that my watching can devolve into some kind of coping mechanism if I'm not careful. Nothing crazy. Similar to that nagging feeling when you KNOW you're having that drink to forget instead of a way to enhance a social interaction, or taking that bong rip so you don't have to think JUST for a little bit, instead of the pleasures of marijuana for its own sake... And that's at 30, AFTER my hormones have quieted after adolescence. If I had the access I do NOW, when I was 12.... I dunno.

I don't have kids yet, but when I do I know that the world they are going to be growing up in is VASTLY different than mine. I'm probably going to have to have a VERY uncomfortable porn talk with my son. Not a "birds-and-the-bees" talk. Not a "masturbation" talk. A PORN talk. A talk that will clearly explain how... consuming pornograpy can be, if he's not careful.

TL;DR Maybe porn CAN be addicting. Don't let the religious packaging of the video distract you from a possibly real, damaging, psychological phenomena

Final note: is there ANY way I can be notified when someone responds to my post? I would like to follow my comment, but I always seem to forget and then check back too late. That "email me replies to this entry" button never seems to work.
puravida said @ 10:21pm GMT on 6th Sep
Holy crap, sorry for the wall of text! Can you tell I've been wanting to get this off my chest for a while? I've never really told anyone about this before, so your thoughtful comments are always appreciated =)
spazm said @ 10:40pm GMT on 6th Sep
*fap fap fap*
...hey...
* fap*
..works
*pant*
..for me!
*fap fap fap*
spazm said @ 10:50pm GMT on 6th Sep
But seriously; Yes, I think porn can lead to obsessive behaviour. I can recall a moment in my life where (and yeah, this is pretty embarrassing, not to mention kind of sad) where I'd spend 100's of euro's, which I didn't have, on websites and chat boxes and shit, up to a moment where I had to chose between paying the rent or that site I didn't completely leech yet. Hell, I wouldn't even wank to it, I'd just download and later see what to do with all that crap.

I chose the right thing luckily, but it was a moment in life I'm definitely not that proud of. And frankly I think a lot of people come across such moments. All together it was too easy for me to get, and that probably goes for a lot of people.

And no, I haven't got it backed up somewhere anymore :P
Honest!
puravida said @ 11:15pm GMT on 6th Sep
Honestly, thanks for your honesty. It IS embarrassing, and I've totally been there. Different details, but similar experience. And yeah, porn is still a part of my life. A positive part of it, I hope.

That's all I'm saying. That this kind of thing may happen more often that we all may care to admit to ourselves or others, and maybe it should be studied/addressed in an open, logical, scientific manner.
spazm said @ 11:51pm GMT on 6th Sep
np.

Porn can be a positive part of life, as long as it doesn't take charge of it. Like so many things I think that's where the difference between enjoying and obsessing lies. The fact that it's everywhere doesn't make it any easier, but alas, perhaps age (perhaps lesser dopamine?) combined with a bit of life experience makes most people more careful : )
EPT said @ 5:35am GMT on 7th Sep
I've only been to a strip club once (they don't do much for me, I can 'look-but-don't-touch' at home) and found it really weird. Upstairs was a catwalk with poles, and the guys watching and the girls strutting were having fun. But downstairs was a series of large tables, each with a couple of guys getting a table dance, each with a semicircle of guys behind them getting that dance for free.

But the weird thing was, all the guys below were taking great pains to avoid showing any emotion at all, all were staunchly po-faced. What's the point of forking out money for entertainment, only to hide your response? Weird.
pleaides said @ 9:20am GMT on 8th Sep
I seem to have the same response to strip clubs that you do, they weird me out no end, and there's all this other connected stuff in my head about the presumed contempt of the ladies present (in whatever capacity) and I can't seem to get over the implicit shame in my head, such that I find myself looking embarassedly away from the areas I'm purportedly there to see. The beers are also indecently overpriced, the atmosphere's seedy, and the music is arse gravy of the first order. Give me a pub with a band any day.
mrcucumber said @ 12:56pm GMT on 8th Sep
I went to one of those glitzy clubs a while back with co-workers. It was some kind of party, so there were about 10 or 12 of us. Dive titty bars appear more 'natural,' if you will, because the girls seem to do it because they want to, instead of those industrial strip clubs where the girls are trying to pay off their student loans. Whatever. We all got appropriately drunk, and one girl with cut off jean shorts and a shirt wrapped around her top looking like Daisy Duke mounts a buddy of mine and starts to take off his tie, etc. Flirty. Shaking her ass all over. She then steps on his hips, reaches into his shorts and grabs the waistband of his underwear and proceeds to rip them off while he is seated . She jubilantly raised them in the air with an appropriate 'Woo Hoo!!" Everybody is laughing. Nice trick. You try ripping the elastic of your boxer shorts. Go ahead.

Anyway, a couple of drinks later the girl saunters over to me (I later found out others "paid" for the service), sits in my lap and starts to remove my already loosened tie. I tell her that I didn't ask for the "procedure" and that I will stop her. With force if necessary. I was very polite. She got all huffy and upset and started to insult me, told my co-workers I was a prude and an asshole.

Some girls like being seen and teasing guys, others do it because they either have to or have few other choices. The last time I've been to a strip joint was about 8 years ago when friends designed an upscale club and I attended the opening, and most of the girls wanted to be there. Showing your breasts these days doesn't seem like a big deal, and many girls (want to) find rich sugar daddies who frequent these clubs buying $100 bottles of champagne.
arctan said @ 10:03pm GMT on 8th Sep
The fact that the girl was pissed at you isn't, of course, proof that she likes her job -- the fact that you don't want a lap dance means you're not going to give a generous tip in return for a lap dance and therefore from her perspective you're just taking up an empty seat that could be filled with a well-paying customer.
mrcucumber said @ 1:05pm GMT on 9th Sep
Have you ever been to an upscale strip club. Sounds like you don't really know how they work.
EPT said @ 3:05pm GMT on 10th Sep
If there are empty seats, then he's not taking up a seat that someone else could be using. If the seats are full, then there's plenty of other folks to try.
mrklipp said @ 11:27pm GMT on 8th Sep [Score:1 Underrated]
Um, am I the only one to think that any kind of threat to use force against a half dressed non violent woman makes you an asshole, regardless of how politely you do so?

If you are that upset about it, you are free to get up and leave. The response you seem to be describing here comes off as more than a little bit creepy.
happiest_sadist said @ 8:40am GMT on 9th Sep [Score:1 Underrated]
I think that those who call people names on the Internet might be assholes, regardless of how passive-agressively they do so.

There's not enough information to assess mrcucumber's comment. I will point out that he stated he'd use force if necessary. That leaves quite a bit of interpretation.

Also, I can assure you that a dancer at a strip club has a great deal more force to bring to bear than does any individual attendee (even if she's not capable of tearing his underwear off him).
mrklipp said @ 9:46am GMT on 9th Sep
Saying you'll use force, regardless of the "if necessary" provisio, is still a very inappropriate comment to make.

It has a lot to do with the context. He wasn't making the comment to Joe on the street, he was making it to someone who has to seriously worry about the *real* possibility of violence from patrons, to the point that there are paid professionals around to step in when this happens, as you pointed out.

That's why it comes across as a bit creepy.
pleaides said @ 10:36am GMT on 9th Sep
How does the same situation sound if you reverse the genders of our two protagonists?
mrklipp said @ 12:26pm GMT on 9th Sep
Do you think that male strippers have to regularly deal with the fear of potential violence from a female patron?

If not, how is yours a reasonable comparison?

Again, it's about context.
Naruki said @ 6:15pm GMT on 9th Sep
Don't worry, the cuke has since explained his first comment below (although he did it in a nasty, hyper-defensive, and hypocritical way).

When he said he would "use force if necessary", it certainly does sound creepy and like he has a potential for violence.
What he later corrected it to was that he would "forcibly remove her", which has a completely different context.
However, he did not acknowledge that his first incorrect context was at all wrong, but instead blamed you for making an entirely appropriate and understandable response to what he said rather than reading his mind and responding to what he thought he said.

When he said that he went to a strip club (where the purpose is to ogle women and get your jollies) and then got pissy at a woman for coming up and trying to give him his jollies, it sounds like you shouldn't have fucking gone to a strip club you goddamned moron. (Sorry, got a bit carried away there. Breathtaking stupidity does that to me.)
What he later indicated is that he voluntarily went to a place to ogle nude women and get his jollies off, but because the place he chose to attend was somehow less "real" and he couldn't be fucked to get the hell out of there and let everyone else have their fun, that her sitting on his lap constituted an act of violence against him.
However, this is a definition of "violence" that even Donnie describing taxation would have to think twice about seriously using. What he should have done was admit that he was a party pooper who should not have stuck around, and that his reporting of the event was fucked in the head, and that he should not accuse someone of "knee jerk judgment" who listened to his fucked up reporting and drew fairly obvious conclusions from it. Rather than attacking you for responding appropriately, he should have come clean and not been a dishonest and hypocritical douchenozzle.

Ahem. Now THIS was some knee jerk judging, mrpukeumber. Compare it to mrklipp's and don't make the same mistake next time.
mrcucumber said @ 6:31pm GMT on 9th Sep
Really. WTF is your problem. It's almost like you can't stand the fact that I ignore you, so like a proper child that you are, you try like hell to find cracks in anything I say and do your best to drive a wedge in it. Even if there is no crack.

You need therapy. Go talk to snowfox.

And no. Do me and others the favor of not responding.

Please, leave me the fuck alone.
snowfox said @ 3:52am GMT on 10th Sep
I was reading through a thread, just watching other people argue, and surprised to see my name come up. You know I appear when you do that, right? Like a goddamn genie. A goddamn Batman genie.

It sounds like the both of you are having a rough day. Let's hug it out =)
spite48 said @ 4:24am GMT on 10th Sep
Did someone say "hug"? I'm in once I find my penis. Has anyone seen my penis? It's detachable.
mechanical contrivance said @ 5:00am GMT on 10th Sep [Score:1 Informative]
I saw it lying on a blanket next to a broken toaster oven.
mrcucumber said @ 12:23pm GMT on 10th Sep
I'm not having a rough day, naruki is being his normal childish self. He must be off his meds.
Naruki said @ 4:25am GMT on 10th Sep [Score:-1]
You ignore me? I hadn't noticed, but thinking about it now, I don't give a shit. Your shit is cracked wider than the Grand Canyon here.

I pretty much DO leave you alone, most of the time. And not because you would stalk me and revenge mod all the time, but because you seemed to need it.

However, I happened upon this thread, and your latest fucktardian response was the last straw to the camel. Leaving you alone means you have to leave others alone. If you won't do that, then I won't treat you like a non-combatant.

It's your choice. As always.
ComposerNate said @ 8:25am GMT on 10th Sep
On the Barcelona beach, these brown ?Vietnamese? women walk along providing a massage service, immediate and right there on the sand. One came up to solicit, I said no, then no again, she continued, then started rubbing my shoulders and I shirked back, telling her to fuck off. It's good she walked away then and didn't try to climb on me, pinning me down in front of my friends, forcing me to free myself physically.

"No" should mean "no," no?
Naruki said @ 3:07am GMT on 11th Sep
Sure should.

Hell, after cuke rewrote his encounter I tend to agree with his actions.

But that's because he rewrote it after seeing how his initial flubbed account was being received.

And that is fine with a "whoops, my bad, this is what I meant".

But I had to take exception to his "fuck you for twisting my words" act. Totally inappropriate. Have a little grace.
EPT said @ 3:01pm GMT on 10th Sep [Score:1 Informative]
A while ago I installed a user script to block Naruki, for pretty much the reasons you state; years of dealing with his crap just finally did my head in where no other user ever had. SE became much more friendly with that blocking script in place - I heartily recommend it.
spite48 said @ 3:13pm GMT on 10th Sep
Wow. Okay. I guess some people just rub other people the wrong way.
EPT said @ 4:03pm GMT on 10th Sep
I've had run-ins with a number of other users on the site, but I've never wanted to censor any of them, and everyone else at least has some sort of internal consistency. Naruki just takes your words, invents new meanings for them that only Naruki knows, and tears into you because of it. He gets juice out of attacking and tearing apart arguments, and as mrcucumber says, when there are no cracks for the wedges, he simply invents them. Often it's a mix of both. It's not something you can ever counter, because he'll just move the goalposts. He'll even clearly display exactly the same thing he's berating you for doing, even in the same comment, without a trace of irony or recognition that he's doing so.

He does have the occasional funny one-liner, but on balance his voice is a marked detriment. I don't think it's particularly classy to mention that I block him, but mrcucumber's comment reminded me of just how spirit-destroying Naruki is. It's not a matter of 'just rubbing other people the wrong way', as that implies it's just incompatable personalities (something I have no problem with), whereas Naruki is pretty much all about attacking (as per mrcucumber's comment).

I just saw mrcucumber's comment, remembered that I've been there, and remembered what cured the problem.
spite48 said @ 4:14pm GMT on 10th Sep
I just don't have the same reaction to Naruki's comments that you do, so the reaction and associated measures surprised me.
mrcucumber said @ 4:46pm GMT on 10th Sep [Score:1 Underrated]
I haven't read every single post or entry, but I'm not aware of naruki instigating senseless and baseless conflict with you. Take this thread for example. Tell me you think he's got any point other than insulting or starting an argument for arguments sake. This is typical naruki, and it happens randomly over time with certain users - users that don't put up with his shit. If you roll over then he's your friend.
spite48 said @ 7:54pm GMT on 10th Sep
Naruki wasn't the first or only one who thought that your 'threat' to use physical force was unreasonable. Personally, I think you were correct to warn the stripper that you didn't intend to participate in the contact, that you were serious, and that you would physically intervene rather that permitting her to proceed. Much better than simply pushing her away or grabbing your belt back. I might have started with a clear "No, I don't want to be touched at all please." You'd be shunned by the workers after that, but it doesn't sound like you really wanted to be there. You didn't give the details of how you said it, and some people assumed the worst until you clarified yourself.

I think that people should be able to go to a strip club to look at naked people without wanting to be touched, and should have an expectation that the workers will ask before touching them. But that isn't the way strip clubs currently work, and you're not the only person who ever got uncomfortable about the absurdly physical way in which lap dances are marketed in the clubs. But that is the way it currently is and anyone who goes to a strip club should go in with an expectation that they won't be touched.

I agree that Naruki over-reacted, and his long comment was overly personal. His reference to breathtaking stupidity and other comments seem a bit trollish looking back, but well within the spectrum of normalcy for SE. But going to a strip club and expecting not to be touched isn't realistic, and Naruki felt that your expectations were absurd. I think that's fair comment, although I think he's failing to account for the somewhat more aggressive than usual touching that you were subjected to.

I actually do remember a couple of times that Naruki disagreed with me in a way that I thought was questionable, but that has happened with some of my favorite people here.

My perspective may also be skewed because, as a lawyer, I'm used to argument that gets quite nasty and quite silly at times. Even the nastiest debates here don't compare to simple phone conversations I've had with very unpleasant lawyers.
spite48 said @ 7:58pm GMT on 10th Sep
correction in paragraph 2 ...should not go in with an expectation that they won't be touched.

although I think that should change and people ideally should be able to go in with an expectation that they won't be touched.
mrcucumber said @ 11:29pm GMT on 10th Sep
It's surprising to think professional debates would be nasty, but it's the reality. I honestly respect your opinion and read your posts, but I did clearly state in the original story that I said what I said politely. Too many years have passed (this happened in 1995) so I paraphrase, but the interpretation was that I was being unreasonable, or a creepy asshole. Far from the reality.

Assuming the worst i guess, is normal here so I should be used to it. With that I agree.
spite48 said @ 1:31am GMT on 11th Sep
Thanks!

I'm dealing with a lawyer right now who is a real turd, but I've dealt with him before. Last time he caught me by surprise with some minor shenanigans, but this time I laid a nice little trap for him.

I noticed that he made a mistake with the rules for the deadline for filing materials. So, I asked him if he was willing to bend the rules a bit in our current dispute. If he responds "No, I require strict compliance with the rules", then I'll explain that he can't rely on his late-filed materials. Maybe too much to wish for...
EPT said @ 12:15am GMT on 11th Sep
After posting my comment last night I went and had a look at an old exchange with Naruki, and one of the major problems with him came flooding back. When you argue normally, you toss around ideas. When Naruki gets involved, all of a sudden you have to re-explain everything as you end up in a semantic war over trivial shit (again, remember he uses his own definitions). Common English idioms get used as a chance to be taken literally and are used to tear you down.

If you respond to him, it stops being a debate about content, and starts being a debate about trivial semantics on what you meant molded within his customised view of the world (which is different in every thread), just so he can get his 'win'.

Perhaps you're right about your experiences as a lawyer, but when it comes down to it, no-one is paying me to waste so much mindspace on Naruki, so out the window he goes.
spite48 said @ 1:32am GMT on 11th Sep [Score:1 Funny]
Fair 'nuff, but please define 'window' and 'goes' without using vowels.
Naruki said @ 3:14am GMT on 11th Sep
I could never be a lawyer since I cannot stand the subjective nature of the arguments you have to deal with, the compromises you are forced to make with reality, and the sheer amount of memorization, among other things. Ugh.

But I do appreciate the fact that your profession recognizes the importance of semantics. That words often have very specific meanings, especially in certain contexts, but other meanings otherwhere.

Since most of what we do here is debate/argue/discuss, it would seem that most of us would sooner or later get the same appreciation. Instead, many people wind up like EPT there, dismissing the confusion caused by their semantic sloppiness as the other guy's fault, blaming that person for all the evils in the world, and generally patting themselves on the back for projecting all their faults onto the "enemy".

But as you say, fair 'nuff. :-)
Naruki said @ 1:49am GMT on 12th Sep [Score:-1 Boring]
And there goes the pukeumber, living down to his reputation again.
ComposerNate said @ 11:04am GMT on 11th Sep [Score:2 Funny]
EPT said @ 4:47pm GMT on 10th Sep
When you enjoy getting into online debates, it's hard not to respond to someone who seems to be addressing your points. The script I use was written by another user who enjoyed debating, but got tired of a couple of users who just were just permanent detractors regardless of the issue.
EPT said @ 2:58pm GMT on 10th Sep
Actually, male strippers are in more danger of physical damage from female patrons. I had a friend who used to work for a company of bouncers, and one arm of the company did security for male and female stripper groups. They reported that females strippers were a fairly tame job, as men know what's expected and why the bouncers are there, whereas the male strippers frequently get into trouble as the female patrons aren't so used to stripping, so they go off their rockers more frequently. Consequently, doing security for a female stripper was a dull job, but you had to be on your guard for the males.
eIfish said @ 9:05am GMT on 9th Sep [Score:1]
Yes.

Anyone that attempts to stop a half-naked person from performing a sex-act on them without their consent is an asshole.
mrcucumber said @ 12:56pm GMT on 9th Sep
I misunderstood. Somebody upmod, please.
pleaides said @ 1:41pm GMT on 9th Sep [Score:1 Underrated]
Allow me, I had to read it twice as well.
mrcucumber said @ 1:04pm GMT on 9th Sep
Wow. I didn't think my story would have garnered such a response. I also feel the need to defend myself when called a creepy asshole.

Knee Jerk judgment much? She wasn't naked, or half naked by the way. She was fully clothed in shorts and a shirt. And non violent? She forcibly climbed on my lap, and started to undress me, taking off my belt, without my consent.

She was "performing a routine" and forced me to participate by using peer pressure and social norms as a weapon to insure her $5 tip (with the possibility of more) and accolades as the center of attention without taking her clothes off. Since I refused, she lost her $20.

Actually, she was the one that was the creepy asshole. I simply made it clear to her that I didn't want to participate, and that she should stop before I physically restrain her. That's what 'force' means. The whole idea of getting up to leave is stupid when she was sitting on my lap. Did you follow along or do you have some personal issue with strip clubs?
snowfox said @ 4:05am GMT on 10th Sep
You had every right to refuse, but you do it with a polite chuckle, "You've got the wrong idea, but thanks anyway," and give her the five bucks for her trouble. Someone made a valid point that you're taking up a seat without paying, and while that isn't contemptible, it's not in the best form. You say that she's trying to force the business on you but she's not too different from a sales person walking up to you in a department store. You might find them annoying but you are in their establishment and they're trying to make money. You have a right to tell them to fuck off, but a social obligation to do it as nicely as possible and not to loiter if you're not planning to buy anything.
mrcucumber said @ 12:21pm GMT on 10th Sep
I made it clear in my story that I said it politely, yet most imagine what they want so that it fits their interpretation of the story.

The owners could care less if you pay for a lap dance. That's money they never had, and its the arrangement they have with the girls who actually take their clothes off. They care that you spend your money on alcohol, so taking up a seat without getting lap dance is not like having coffee for three hours at a restaurant. They couldn't give a lap dance to everybody in the club if they wanted to. There simply are not enough girls. Besides, for the third time, this girl was completely clothed.

This is a strip club where the woman just ripped off the underwear from my co-worker, loud music, groups of people drinking heavily seated around lounge sofas and ottomans, dark disco lighting, and a smattering of women walking around in thongs. The social obligation is for both parties to be civil. The club employee was not. She was already abrasive and arrogant, and I have to be more polite than say "no thanks, please stop, I didn't ask for this. If you don't stop, I will restrain you if you continue"?
EPT said @ 3:04pm GMT on 10th Sep
Why should he give her money to not destroy his underwear?
snowfox said @ 4:07am GMT on 10th Sep
I should add that you're right, she should not have touched you, let alone started undressing you, without some kind of goahead. That's not ok.
mechanical contrivance said @ 5:01am GMT on 10th Sep
Why would she need a goathead? What kind of club was this?
conception said @ 11:23pm GMT on 6th Sep
http://yourbrainonporn.com/your-brain-on-porn-series paints a fairly strong argument for your point. reddit.com/r/nofap also has some interesting information on the effects of pornography being everywhere.
b said @ 12:22am GMT on 7th Sep
I find, and of course YMMV, that I crave porn way, way less when I'm having regular sex. I still like the occasional wank, even if I'm getting it four or five times a week, but I honestly kind of just forget about porn when I'm think that ok, I'm going to see my girl later on tonight and I am for sure going to get some sweet, sweet lovin'.

Then of course, I'll be walking along and see a really attractive woman in a really attractive (read: revealing/sexy/tight) outfight and I'm like, Ok, jerking off when I get home.
kichijoii said @ 10:58pm GMT on 6th Sep
Addiction to anything is possible. The symptoms are all the same: all-consuming obsession with the next hit, over-consumption of the thing beyond normal amounts (usually in response to decreasing satisfaction with each hit), ignorance of most other aspects of living, loss of pleasure in other pursuits. It's not a phenomenon that's limited to porn.

And that's my problem with the idea presented in this "news" clip. It assumes that porn is inherently addicting or corrupting, that just watching it should be classified as an addiction. Sure, the kid was hiding it from his parents and reported feeling depressed, but IMO that has less to do with porn and more to do with the stigma surrounding it (not to mention the typical embarrassment anyone feels when his sexuality is exposed to his parents). There was NOTHING in this video that presented a real case for any possibly addicting effects of porn.

I like your analysis of why porn is so alluring, and I agree with you. However, whether it is a maladaptive trait is debatable. Reproduction is simply not considered the main function of sex anymore. People are more concerned with the pleasure. And frankly, given problems with overpopulation and the high costs of raising children in general, I'd say it is not a bad switch. You probably already know of the studies that suggest that the harder you work to obtain a thing, the more you will enjoy finally receiving that thing. I think that is what you enjoyed in your early days. However, I believe the increased availability of porn is good because the more ubiquitous it is, the less stigmatizing it will be. And that is a good thing for human sexuality, IMO.

If anything, the real problem was that instead of spending all those hours chasing down real girls, you were looking for flat images of them. ;-) That is the main problem I personally have with porn: I think its a waste of time. But that's a different argument for another day.
puravida said @ 11:19pm GMT on 6th Sep
I didn't think that the clip was suggesting that porn is inherently addicting or corrupting, but for the record I totally agree with that claim. We're on the same page there. I had assumed that the kid has the symptoms you describe in your first paragraph, the signs of an addiction.

If people are tripping out that he's fapping to some porn a few times a week, they need to chill the fuck out.

And yes, porn can be AMAZING. It's a great outlet, and yeah, I'm all for porn over population explosions and the costs of child-rearing. I only meant that it has the potential to be maladaptive.

Yeah, we agree pretty much on the majority of points, now that I look at it =)
puravida said @ 11:20pm GMT on 6th Sep
*totally DISAGREE with that claim. Porn is NOT inherently corrupting =)
kichijoii said @ 3:35am GMT on 7th Sep
Ah, I really meant it was a claim by omission. That is, because they didn't present any specific reasons, one would have to assume that porn was somehow bad in order to make sense of their argument. I think that it is an assumption that is too often accepted without question. Watch it again and you'll see that they never actually say what is bad about porn or how it hurt any of the kids.
chold_numa said @ 10:59pm GMT on 6th Sep [Score:2 Interesting]
Actually, that's an interesting point. I think there's something to it if you look at say Japan. They have a big problem with a declining birth rate, and I think it's due in no small part to porn. Porn is available almost everywhere in Japan. You can walk down certain streets and every third store will be selling pornography in the form of videos, magazines, or comics. It can be very confronting if you're not prepared for it. It doesn't really carry the same social stigma as it does in Western countries.

Anyhow, in recent years (with very poor employment prospects for young people), I think porn (along with other things such as TV, anime, other hobbies) has become more of a means of escape from the fairly dire prospects of reality, where young people stagger from part time job to part time job or are just supported by their parents. So, while it is an 'evil', it's nothing like heroin addiction, or beating people up on the street for kicks Clockwork Orange style. I think the availability of porn contributes slightly to the low level of violent crime in Japan (with some qualifiers - ie. lower rate of reporting rapes and sexual crimes against children, which I think Japanese porn encourages).

In summary, if you're not spending every free moment watching porn, finding excuses to watch porn, skipping school/work to watch porn, watching porn instead of having sex, or other clearly addictive behaviours, I think it's probably OK. It's a natural human drive. It shouldn't be a substitute for sex, but the consumption of porn shouldn't be seen as a major problem unless it's done excessively, which would be the case with any behaviour. I think the trend towards mainstreaming more violent/degrading porn is more of a concern.
zarathustra said @ 11:32pm GMT on 6th Sep
I agree with you on some points. However, pretty much anything can become an unhealthy addiction taken to an extreme. People who spend all their time working or studying or exercising or praying may not have time to have otherwise healthy lives and relationships. When they have set backs in those lives and relationships they may fall back even more upon whatever it is that is causing the problem in the first place. The problem with porn addiction is that, unlike, at least working, studying or exercising, there is no reward beyond a quick wank and society, at least some of it, tosses in an extra burden of shame and guilt. So is this at least to some extent a social problem rather than a personal problem?

The other issue that stands out is the age thing. Once kids are old enough to be getting laid regularly would porn be an issue or is it only an issue when it overwhelms them before they have real access and becomes a substitute for trying to compete, sexually, in the real world?

Also where do you draw the line on how much is too much? ( I know it will not be an, excuse me, hard and fast line.) Is an hour a day too much if it does not interfere with other things? I don't know about you, but between hitting up girls, working out, and so on, I spent a hell of a lot more than an hour a day on getting laid in high school. Sure those things had other benefits but sex was their goal. Would that make it an unhealthy sex addiction? I would have had a lot more time to study, would have drank less, and spent a lot less money if I had spent on hour a day on porn instead.
ckfahrenheit said @ 5:47am GMT on 7th Sep
I basically feel that 'too much' of anything is when it ends up interfering with your work.

Some might also say interference with personal relationships, but I avoid those, so I couldn't speak for that point of view. No time, don'tcha know...
dj-glass said @ 2:09am GMT on 8th Sep
Just to have fun playing devil's advocate... That's called being a workaholic. When your addiction to work interferes with any chance of personal relationships. Everyone's got their own set of priorities and values as to where to put their limited time and energy.
spite48 said @ 11:38pm GMT on 6th Sep [Score:1 Interesting]
We are currently conducting a huge social experiment on virtually every human being in developed countries:

Does ubiquitous and freely available explicit pornography of virtually every description have any effect on people, particularly young people?

Does it reduce or enhance their rates of participation in actual intercourse?
Does it improve or reduce their sexual competence?
Does it improve or worsen their level of respect for other people, and/or their ability to thrive in sexual relationships?
Does it change their expectations of what will occur during sexual encounters?

How many 20 something men expect their sexual partners to attempt anal intercourse, A2M, deepthroat, or other activities prominent in pornography, but likely largely absent from most sexual encounters prior to 1900?
maryyugo said @ 12:24am GMT on 7th Sep
A2M? I hope everyone has hepatitis vaccine.
midden said @ 6:55pm GMT on 7th Sep
Or a long term relationship with a healthy partner, as with any sexually transmittable disease.
maryyugo said @ 8:54pm GMT on 7th Sep [Score:1 Informative]
Yes. It looks as if this is necessary these days. But ass to mouth makes one prone to a whole panoply of viral and bacterial and protozoan diseases. It doesn't seem like a really great idea. What you're basically doing is eating shit. I don't think our evolution selected for that.
spite48 said @ 10:24pm GMT on 7th Sep
Sure, it's risky. But it's not that risky. First of all, it's your own feces, so although opportunistic bacterial infections are possible with respect to e-coli and other pathogens that are less harmful in your lower digestive tract than in your mouth, most of the risks are minimal it it's your own ass.

And let's keep things in perspective - if the ass has been cleaned first, and there's no visible feces, you may have eaten more of other people's shit just from touching money in restaurants.

I'm sure any parent who has toddlers running around sticking their dirty fingers in their face ingests more feces than anyone engaging in occasional ATM with their partner.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ass_to_mouth
maryyugo said @ 11:42pm GMT on 7th Sep
Maybe. Most times it's your partner's shit (unless you're licking your own asshole which takes an acrobatic sort of talent). And then however clean you think it is, if you penetrate the sphincter, it's all pure shit all over again. If you like eating shit, it's fine. Otherwise, I'd avoid it.
spite48 said @ 5:55am GMT on 8th Sep
With all due respect, you don't know what you're talking about.

First of all, rimming and A2M are not the same thing. If you can perform A2M and end up with oral contact with your partner's shit, then you are more flexible than most.

Also, neither ass-fucking, nor rimming usually involve any direct contact with shit whatsoever unless the people doing it have no idea what they are doing, or no common courtesy. It can happen I suppose, but generally not.
theolypse said @ 10:48pm GMT on 8th Sep
More than due, I feel.
dreamingzephyr said @ 9:06pm GMT on 7th Sep
"Relationship" is not synonymous with "monogamous relationship."
EPT said @ 5:30am GMT on 7th Sep
You can't really analyse porn in a vacuum like that. You're talking about a time when homosexuals were imprisoned, wives were not supposed to have a job (or even the vote), sex outside marriage was seen as extremely immoral, and there was poor access to birth control, amongst a raft of other things.
spite48 said @ 7:04am GMT on 7th Sep
None of these claims are true throughout all of human history and in all cultures, except arguably the birth control access claim. Technological advances mean that video pornography is now ubiquitous, whereas the closest previous analogues were naughty statues, crude roman graffiti, or erotic drawings available only to the very rich.

mrcucumber said @ 1:51pm GMT on 7th Sep
...Or actual whores for the very rich, and cheaper ones for the poor.
graham said @ 6:07am GMT on 7th Sep [Score:1 Informative]
Easiest thing to do is just watchlist the post and hope when it dings that someone is responding to your comment :D
midden said @ 6:59pm GMT on 7th Sep
Both the watchlist option as well as an option for receiving email of all replies should appear as check boxes right above where you type your own reply. I think I've only used these a few times, and years ago, so I can't vouch for them working these days.
snowfox said @ 10:38pm GMT on 6th Sep [Score:3 Insightful]
The only real problem I see with teens and porn is that they develop unrealistic expectations about sex and get a very sexist idea of how sex is supposed to work. Porn is mostly made for men, so you're not going to see a fair portrayal of female sexuality and there's going to be a message that sex is really all about male gratification.
spazm said @ 10:55pm GMT on 6th Sep [Score:1 Interesting]
I totally agree with the fact that porn is mostly made for men, and develops unrealistic expectations. However, and this disturbed me for quite a while and still does sometimes, my gf looks at way rougher porn than I do. That said, she doesn't feel like doing the same as what she's watching.
snowfox said @ 2:44am GMT on 7th Sep [Score:5 Informative]
That is normal. It is called the rape response. Basically threatening things make women lubricate defensively to prevent genital injury.
ahPook said @ 4:39am GMT on 7th Sep [Score:1 Funny]
Wow, thank you.
Naruki said @ 4:52am GMT on 7th Sep [Score:2 Funny]
And the stress also adds chemical compounds that act as natural spermicide, thereby preventing rabe babies.
snowfox said @ 6:28am GMT on 7th Sep [Score:1 Funny]
I find that remark insensitive to babies who suffer from rabe! Aren't their lives hard enough without your jibes?
Naruki said @ 5:12am GMT on 8th Sep
Repe me with a vagina, how did that typo get in there?!
happiest_sadist said @ 9:17am GMT on 9th Sep
Rabies babies, inflicted on ladies
maybe by shady haters
fading later from rabid habits
they jumper like rabbits
that foam's not spermicidal
it's societal, and we buy it all
while they bite all
belated labia, lovely lady baleen
inseminate insensate insanity
spirochete inspiring panspermia
Now Hades, rabies babies come to learn of ya
lilmookieesquire said @ 6:47am GMT on 7th Sep
I see you've earned your MD!
cb361 said @ 11:08am GMT on 7th Sep
This is one of the most counter-intuitive things I learned. From reading, I hasten to add, not from practical experience. We often think of lubrication in women as analogous to an erection in men, a sign of sexual arousal. But women have reported getting wet when faced with the imminence of rape, when they most definitely weren't turned on. It's simply a practical physiological mechanism that has evolved :-( for protection.
eIfish said @ 2:52pm GMT on 7th Sep
But it is analogous to erection in men. Erection in men no more implies consent than lubrication in women. Your ancestors that facilitated their own rape had more children than those that stayed flaccid.
cb361 said @ 7:21pm GMT on 7th Sep
An erection in men is a definite sign of sexual arousal. Many people think that lubrication in women is the same. I didn't say that either had anything at all to consent.
spite48 said @ 7:55pm GMT on 7th Sep [Score:2 Underrated]
Depends what you mean by arousal. As you suggest, the physical state of arousal can exist without mental arousal, interest in sex, or consent - in both men and women.

But I don't see why you would differentiate between them. Both lubrication (in women) and erection (in men) are indicators of physical arousal which are not consciously controlled. Erections are no different from lubrication in that regard. Neither physical response confirms mental attraction or consent.

We have to stop trying to connect involuntary physical response with mental state. Any person can be physically aroused, and even orgasm without consent, and to suggest otherwise would unfairly give rise to a defense of rape which has long been repudiated in most responsible legal systems: "She enjoyed it" is not a defense to rape, and neither is "He enjoyed it"
spite48 said @ 10:32pm GMT on 7th Sep
By the way, I'm not suggesting in my last paragraph that you were saying anything more than what you wrote, I was just carrying my thoughts forward.
mrcucumber said @ 11:01pm GMT on 7th Sep
You want a briefcase for those?
EPT said @ 1:15am GMT on 10th Sep [Score:1 Insightful]
There was a case in the papers here a couple of years ago where a taxi driver was raped at knifepoint. She was giving him a blowjob and he still got an erection, but he was non-consenting (laughed at by police, apparently).

Also, the easiest example of arousal not equalling consent is the married man who wants to stay faithful.
spite48 said @ 1:21am GMT on 10th Sep
Good example. I had a long list in a wall of text, that I removed from my comment. Another scenario:

Two aroused people, both attracted to each other. Both consent to kissing and mutual masturbation. During mutual masturbation - either one suddenly starts coitus without notice or protection. Consent would have been withheld for any number of reasons (religious, birth control concern, std concern, personal boundaries, desire to take it slow etc)
ComposerNate said @ 8:27am GMT on 10th Sep
Or the virgin wishing to remain chaste.
EPT said @ 2:36am GMT on 8th Sep
No it's not definite. I've had erections from car vibrations without feeling the slightest bit aroused.
spite48 said @ 5:57am GMT on 8th Sep
I've had erections from crazy ladies who wanted to fuck me, and were offering themselves to me, but I sure wasn't aroused or consenting on account of the crazy.
cb361 said @ 8:42pm GMT on 8th Sep
Odd. I don't think I've ever had an erection from anything other than a feeling of sexual arousal. Except for those ones you get when you're asleep.

Perhaps that was a really sexy car.
theolypse said @ 10:52pm GMT on 8th Sep
Not even as an early teen? That would be almost alarmingly strange.
EPT said @ 1:16am GMT on 10th Sep
Not so much as a semi-on? Never had to reseat your member in your pants because it's partially engorged for some unknown reason?
eIfish said @ 1:42pm GMT on 7th Sep
So she doesn't really find the pornography arousing, but instead watches something she finds threatening and unpleasant in order to save time?
snowfox said @ 11:26pm GMT on 7th Sep
I can't say specifically why any one specific person plays with their rape response, I just know that it's a thing.
eIfish said @ 1:09am GMT on 7th Sep [Score:1 Insightful]
I never understood that: the very fact that sex is on the screen is enough to gratify men.

Men are very easy to gratify.

Why they think unrealistic depictions of sex are necessary is beyond me.
darkener said @ 3:21am GMT on 7th Sep [Score:1 Interesting]
Men are super easy to stimulate this way because it's mostly about visual stimuli. Pretty much everything men find arousing about women's bodies "just because" turns out to be a heuristic for health (read: baby making ability). Men can have sex for two minutes, inseminate the woman, and walk away. Evolutionary incentive success.

For women it's a lot more complicated because they're looking for traits like social skills (in addition to physical stuff). This difference being a result of women being able to have roughly 1 baby per year max, vs 2 minute sex. The supermajority of porn is made for men, but the supermajority of "erotic literature" is written for women. 50 Shades of Grey is shitty and unrealistic, but super popular because it gratuitously pushes all the pleasure buttons in the lady-brain.
EPT said @ 2:38am GMT on 8th Sep
The same could be said of any movie, particularly blockbusters.
lilmookieesquire said @ 6:45am GMT on 7th Sep
US Professional has evolved to be really weird (it seems to be all fake boobs, anal, choking, slapping and repetitive monotonic moaning) that focuses purely on the male orgasm. I find it to be totally anti-erotic.

I tend to prefer Japanese porn in that there seems to be much more foreplay, and even though it's more female submissive the female orgasm, even if faked, seems much more important (i.e. there's usually a clip where the guy gets the girl off and then it ends)
damnit said @ 8:18am GMT on 7th Sep [Score:1 Insightful]
I did not know doing 9-5 jobs involved those. I'm clearly in the wrong business.
Omegaphobic said @ 9:22am GMT on 7th Sep [Score:1 Interesting]
This. Yes. Totally. The porn market makes the content that it can monetise and this is the content that Western porn consumers are paying for. It really speaks volumes as to how fucked-up the average Western male's view of sexuality is.

It sickens and disturbs me to see a clip of an attractive young woman who seems enthusiastic about engaging in sex, only to suddenly have a giant penis rammed down her throat so that she is forced to gag, nearly vomit and cough for breath. I'm not even talking about willing deep-throating, which can be quite a display of skill... it is, basically, oral rape. How is that a fucking turn-on? How is that now par for the fucking course in mainstream porn?

There are so many much better sources for porn out there that feature women and couples and groups who are all enthusiastic and enjoying themselves. I Shot Myself is fucking amazing. I have a huge collection of their stuff and I happily paid for the membership to acquire it.
lilmookieesquire said @ 5:32am GMT on 9th Sep
It sickens and disturbs me to see a clip of an attractive young woman who seems enthusiastic about engaging in sex, only to suddenly have a giant penis rammed down her throat so that she is forced to gag, nearly vomit and cough for breath. I'm not even talking about willing deep-throating, which can be quite a display of skill... it is, basically, oral rape. How is that a fucking turn-on? How is that now par for the fucking course in mainstream porn?


Yes this. Thank you.

I'm actually looking for a few good porn sites if you can recommend some.
happiest_sadist said @ 8:48am GMT on 9th Sep
"this is the content that Western porn consumers are paying for. It really speaks volumes as to how fucked-up the average Western male's view of sexuality is."

Does the "average Western male" pay for porn? I never have (and I never would pay for any porn that shows women treated in the way you mention or many other fucked-up scenarios I've also seen).

I don't even really know anyone who pays for porn, even though a good friend of mine works at a porn store (he assures me that he does not pay for porn, and that he's seen 'quite enough, thank you').

I suggest that porn of this type [and most strip clubs] caters to psychopaths. Apparently they are good at making money.
eIfish said @ 9:10am GMT on 9th Sep
They totally do.

Simply by contracting with an ISP, you've already become one of the elite.
mrcucumber said @ 2:40pm GMT on 9th Sep
My take is that in this society, men don't feel like they have control where ultimately the woman is the one who approves the mating ritual. You know what I mean, right? The woman is the one who, with reasonable, sensible people, opens her legs for sex.

This builds resentment and bitterness, to be expressed in lashing out or revenge. This is where the domination thing and brutality in today's pr0n comes from, I think - because it makes money, clicks, etc. Just like any other "business," the idea is to make a connection with and appeal to emotion, desire, or instinctual aspects of our character. People accept this kind of thing because they can see sex, nakedness, etc. and overlook the other aspects that are undesirable, allowing the industry to gain momentum in its production of mainstream, male pleasure dominated pr0n.
EPT said @ 4:12pm GMT on 10th Sep
I know of at least one person who pays for porn.
snowfox said @ 9:10am GMT on 9th Sep
This is why like amateur porn -- the enthusiasm and pleasure. It's also why I write smut for others to enjoy, or why I watch fetish videos. It's no fun if they look like they're not into it.

As for deep-throating, I am not sure how anyone does it. I can't even handle a guy thrusting while I blow. If I don't control the motion, I get nauseated.
mechanical contrivance said @ 2:11pm GMT on 9th Sep
Some people can suppress their gag reflex.
Also, if you write erotic fiction, what kind? Got any we can read?
Seneki69 said @ 4:10am GMT on 10th Sep
Better yet, how about some erotic non-fiction?
snowfox said @ 4:28am GMT on 10th Sep
lol you won't like it. It's pony smut.
mechanical contrivance said @ 5:04am GMT on 10th Sep
I suppose it depends on what the ponies are doing.
spite48 said @ 4:39am GMT on 10th Sep
I understand that deep-throating is a skill like any other. Some have particular aptitude for it, and others have particularly strong gag reflex, which makes it more challenging. But either way, I think the reflex can be overcome by most if they are motivated to do it.
snowfox said @ 4:56am GMT on 10th Sep
I don't feel any obligation or need to overcome it though. It's a natural and necessary reflex that helps to prevent choking. As far as I know, the only way to really suppress it is to provoke it so much it stops working, like bulimic people do. I would probably throw up a lot in the process.

Does any of that sound sexy to you?
mechanical contrivance said @ 5:03am GMT on 10th Sep
Well, I have seen some vomit porn...
kichijoii said @ 10:40pm GMT on 6th Sep
Holy shit I was laughing the whole time.

I would respond very simply: having secrets and lying are not the same thing. The only link between porn and depression is how much shame you want to dump on his/her budding sex drive.

I'd like to copy that guy's presentation and change the instances of "porn" to "cheetos" or "soda." Those things are provably bad for you, and they do take advantage of your brain's instincts. I bet I would make more positive change in the world than that guy.
puravida said @ 11:12pm GMT on 6th Sep
I totally agree that this is all a function of how much shame you place on the "budding sex-drive". Teaching kids that their sex-drives are normal would go a long way. But I also think the "shame" as two components: The shame of masturbating ("eww... that's gross, bible-thumping, etc), and the shame of not doing the things you said you were going to do (didn't study or play outside when you really meant to because you were fapping). I think it's this latter shame that the article might be alluding too.

I only halfway agree with your cheetoh/soda analogy. First off, we do have an obesity epidemic going on, and non-nutritive foods is a HUGE component of this. So yeah, in a sense it DOES apply.

Also, I'm sorry, but I don't think you can compare cheetos and SEX. We have a whole appendage whose only function is for sex. If we had a "cheeto" appendage, or we were constantly thinking about soda all day and all night, and having "wet dreams" about pepsi, THEN it'd be a fair analogy.
eIfish said @ 1:19am GMT on 7th Sep
But we do have a whole organic system for cheetos. It takes up over half the human body. Yes, it can eat other things as well, but "cheetos" is as needlessly specific to the entirety of cuisine as "masturbation to pornography" is to sex.

Many people do constantly think about soda day and night. If that weren't the case, no-one would be obese. Spontaneously manifesting pepsi to imbibe while sleeping is a much greater logistical challenge than manifesting semen to excrete, but I bet if you snuck pepsi in a sleeping person's mouth, they'd drink it.
kichijoii said @ 3:48am GMT on 7th Sep
In college I sat through two separate presentations by different professors on why the cheeto is the perfect food, evolutionarily speaking. Off the top of my head: it is a plentiful food source, easy to acquire, takes zero preparation, and is loaded with flavor.

Basically, the cheeto is engineered to be completely attractive to the human being. Just like soda. Just like porn.

I thought you would agree because you connected the sex drive to the food drive in your first post. I think they are comparable because, like you said, the drives cannot be turned off. Much like how you will always want sex, you will always want food. So, think of the food drive as the "cheeto" appendage.
puravida said @ 5:08am GMT on 7th Sep
You bring a damn good point. Touché.

Maybe I'm the one underestimating the deliciousness of Cheetos?
Quidmore said @ 5:19am GMT on 7th Sep
YOUR CHEETOS, SIR
maryyugo said @ 11:13pm GMT on 6th Sep [Score:5 Insightful]
The problem I see is that in the typical highly religious family in a sexually repressive religion like Catholicism or Mormonism, there is no opportunity for the children to be educated about what sex is really like and how to enjoy it in a non-destructive manner.

So they don't learn how sex most often is best with a relationship, with consideration of the other person, with foreplay, with technique, with concern, with moderate alcohol and marijuana, with lots of time and a nice place to do it, and so on.

So they don't try it with a valued partner but often their first experience is in a totally intoxicated and semi-conscious state with someone they don't know or know and don't value or someone taking advantage of them for money. And it isn't fun. It's grim. No wonder it's easier and more gratifying to fap to porn!
darkener said @ 3:29am GMT on 7th Sep
For me it wasn't a religious upbringing, but rather parents who were simply uninvolved. I developed social skills extremely late and have never had a serious relationship because I simply don't know how. As much as I would have whined at the time, I wish they would have kicked me off the goddamn computer and forced me to interact with other kids a little more.

Whereas on the other hand porn has a point and click interface.
kichijoii said @ 3:55am GMT on 7th Sep
Seconded.
mechanical contrivance said @ 1:55am GMT on 7th Sep
Porn is easy.
zarathustra said @ 2:32am GMT on 7th Sep
Comedy is Hard
mjteegarden said @ 2:41am GMT on 7th Sep [Score:3 Insightful]
Burmashave
GordonGuano said @ 2:52am GMT on 7th Sep [Score:1 Funny]
Meant to post this here:
ComposerNate said @ 7:30am GMT on 7th Sep
Masturbation isn't natural with a circumcised penis.
Aephon said @ 9:26am GMT on 7th Sep
Man, the time and money I'd save with a foreskin.
mechanical contrivance said @ 11:10pm GMT on 7th Sep
I don't understand what that means.
ComposerNate said @ 6:42am GMT on 8th Sep
Mammals are born with foreskin, using it as a sleeve for masturbation. Circumcised penises are not found in nature, are unnatural. Only humans masturbate with unnaturally circumcised penises.
spite48 said @ 8:19am GMT on 8th Sep
But what is the significance of the observation?
ComposerNate said @ 9:30am GMT on 8th Sep
Can you think of any more reasonable rationale against masturbation? Because none was given in this video, or ever, beyond it separating this kid from his religious brainwashing and those creating and using his guilt to strengthen Mormon indoctrination.
Naruki said @ 2:21pm GMT on 8th Sep
Haven't watched the video, so maybe my confusion would be explained there, but... Your argument doesn't make sense to me.

Assuming you are a righty, if you lost your right arm in an accident, then it would be "unnatural" to do right-arm things with your left arm. How is that supposed to be a valid argument against doing those things?
ComposerNate said @ 3:10pm GMT on 8th Sep
Saying something is unnatural is not a valid argument against doing anything I can come up with. Yet it remains of the most so of arguments, however specious, used by Americans religiously indoctrinated and aiming to avoid saying "because GOD told me so."

That said, if any other animal loses a limb, it will adapt and go on naturally finding another way, using another limb most obviously, so I would consider a righty using their left from necessity completely natural. Cutting off their right arm to force using their left as commanded by a god, that's rightfully considered mental illness, and a special kind I would consider unnatural. It would be fantastic to discover animals beyond humans devised gods and godlaws, though I can't imagine to what ends.
ComposerNate said @ 3:22pm GMT on 8th Sep
Though now I see your point, that while circumcised, he adapted as all animals would do after a wounding. It's just a particular wounding, though common among (American+ religious) humans, that's not found in nature; no other male mammals masturbate without a foreskin.

So I'm left with no reason for this kid. Carry on, unless you come up with something.

Masturbation: you must fight your natural impulses
Homosexuality: you must not because it's not natural
Sex before marriage: you must fight your natural impulses
Murder/Thievery/Greed/Lust: you must fight your natural impulses

So maybe "it's not natural" is only used to defend homosexual bigotry? But I heard "it's only natural" used as an excuse quite a bit growing up, now can't recall in what circumstances.
krimz said @ 3:42pm GMT on 8th Sep
If nothing else I'd think it would chafe more without..
ComposerNate said @ 3:52pm GMT on 8th Sep
Shyness/Fear/Fatherly pride: it's only natural

So homosexuality is the only sin for being unnatural, despite it indeed being natural? Nuts. Rationalizing religion is hard. Jews with tattoos.
mechanical contrivance said @ 3:31am GMT on 9th Sep
Nuns with guns.
ComposerNate said @ 9:19am GMT on 9th Sep
Popes with smokes.
snowfox said @ 9:12am GMT on 9th Sep
I believe the point was that calling out masturbation as unnatural is rather silly when we don't believe in natural penii. "Unnatural" is used as the reason why things should not be done, but that reason seems to have unusual and arbitrary blindspots, suggesting it's not the reason at all and the people who tout it are hypocritical douchenozzles.
Bob Denver said @ 8:16am GMT on 7th Sep [Score:1 Underrated]
No wonder he killed all those Jedi kids.
selfimportant said @ 11:02am GMT on 7th Sep [Score:1 Informative]
Not going to make a judgment as to whether e-sleaze is/isn't "A Problem" social, health, or otherwise. But I've begun wondering if recent "Nightline" installments are working some manner of deeply meta humorous angle, which flies over the head of the producers and show staff but still draws enough audience that no one's the wiser. Also I wonder what fraction of the audience is in on that. It started with a show about a year ago, regarding a not-even-barely legal Florida girl upset over unwanted levels of web celebrity arising from her personal photography hobby (more like unwonted, if the pics can be believed). So naturally she and the folks go on a national network program to speak out about it. That's what you would do, right? To stop all the harmful publicity

If the premise of this newscast had been explained to teenaged me--e.g. there's this young guy giving motivational talks about dancing with Mr. Pronstone, in that dramatic tone of any random harrowing memoir of smack addiction--I would have assumed it was a sketch from The State or KITH.
selfimportant said @ 11:20am GMT on 7th Sep [Score:1 Funny]
Heh, 69th comment. Heheh
kichijoii said @ 7:45pm GMT on 7th Sep
+1 perfect comment/username lineup
krimz said @ 3:56pm GMT on 9th Sep
I do watch porn on occasion but it always leaves me with a sense of disappointment and I think the reason for that is that I don't have any connection with the people involved. These are complete strangers having "sex" and I will probably never get to meet them so why should I be interested? It's not even voyeurism from my side because I'm completely irrelevant to them. I have to feel that I have some kind of stake in what I'm watching and that I'm somehow being targeted, otherwise I'll just feel sordid and/or bored.
krimz said @ 4:06pm GMT on 9th Sep
I guess if there was some way of conveying intimacy in a pornmovie...
themanwhoeatslettus said @ 1:00am GMT on 10th Sep
Watching a cam girl and paying her shit tons of money so she knows your screen name and beggs you for money. that would make you involved
krimz said @ 5:29am GMT on 10th Sep
I don't have a shit ton of money... :(
spite48 said @ 5:38am GMT on 10th Sep
That's interesting. Certainly porn can seem silly or pointless to some. Others can either put themselves in the place of the participants, or enjoy the voyeuristic aspect of it, or enjoy a fetishistic activity or body part.

Some porn, involves a more personal introduction to the fucking, but if you cannot get past the lack of your involvement, I can see how that would be frustrating.
krimz said @ 6:20am GMT on 10th Sep
It's not really much of a problem but I wanted to give an explanation as to why I don't usually give any upmods (or downmods) for porn posts, they just doesn't do anything for me. When I see these tumblr-thingies I just end up wondering about who these people are. Why did they take these pictures and whom were they meant for originally?

Post a comment
[note: if you are replying to a specific comment, then click the reply link on that comment instead]

You must be logged in to comment on posts.
home | home2 | Sensible Election | about | conduct | galleries not logged in | log in



Members

Registered: 24557
Classifieds

Heaven666
What has been seen cannot be un-seen

BOOBLE
Search sites, pics, movies, personals.

Best Porn
Reviews of the best porn sites with pics, vids, scene desription and member area preview

LONELY GUYS
Meet Women Near You