Pornography

[MrFun]

Originally posted by WhiteElephants


I don't know, can you really consider yourself an adult when you consistently crap your pants?

Damn people, when did this turn into John Ashsroft's Bible study group? Laugh a little, eh? I know it's Sunday and all, but c'mon.

Besides if I hadn't responded to MrFun I probably would have been accussed of ignoring him.

There are SOME people whom I never care to hear replies from.

[Jethro83]

I don't have a very high opinion of pornography at all.

Pornography trivializes nudity and sex to the extent that it loses meaning.

I do want to see a woman naked... when she is my significant other and our relationship gets to the point of such high amounts of trust. And I do want sex with her as well... as an act of undying love (I know... I'm too much of an idealist).

When the two people romantically involved trust and love each other enough to get naked together and have sex, it is a beautiful thing, as long as it is kept between the two involved.

But when its a public display, and the involved people know it is, then it is a completely repulsive sight to behold. And when someone looks at it, and other things like it continually, nudity and sex become trivial matters to them and then the values that make the more pleasurable side of human life more pleasurable are lost. And once they are lost, they are extremely hard, if not impossible to get back.

EDIT: I APOLOGIZE FOR COMMENT: "People who go off and pose nude, or have sex in front of the camera obviously don't know the meaning of trust, or love. Apart from their love of quick cash. " A LAPSE OF BRAIN ACTIVITY ON MY PART. SHAME ON ME!!! SHAME SHAME SHAME

[Provost Harrison]

Some of us don't have the luxury of having a significant other. So what else do we do?

[loinburger]

Originally posted by LordAzreal
People who go off and pose nude, or have sex in front of the camera obviously don't know the meaning of trust, or love.

There's a difference between "trust and love" and "sex." There's a difference between "sex for emotional gratification" and "sex for physical gratification." Just because somebody engages in the latter does not preclude their ability to engage in the former (often simultaneously).

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by WhiteElephants
Well I guess you've never seen the ads for women's underwear in the newpaper? You've never perused a catalog of Victoria's Secret -- how much is really left to speculate?

Please let me know when Victoria's Secret starts displaying one woman sprawled across two pages. Yes, I have seen Vicky's Secret, and while the pictures are definately titillating, they are not that similar to Playboy. In the pages of Playboy the photographs tend to be much larger and more defined. While you might be able to make out some nipples in VS, they are the purpose of Playboy.

Furthermore, I would like to point out that VS is primarily targeted at women, and is only incidentally a visual aid for men. Women in VS do not stick their posteriors up in the air, in the classic animal presentation for sex, nor do they hump various things, drip food or soap suds down their bodies, etc.

Don't get me wrong, I like Playboy. But like almost every other pleasure, it comes with a price. We shouldn't pretend it doesn't exist, just because we want to look at it.

Did the Sports Illistrated swim suit issue leave you vague clues as well?

SI's "Swimsuit Issue" is in the same catagory as Playboy. It is for men, not women. Here you're helping my argument.

What of the various Mtv videos with women in multiple stages of undress -- say, the video for that Moulin Rouge song where the perfromers wore articles of lingerie? Pick up an issue of Bazzar or Elle next time your at your local grocer and follow the trail of mysterious clues you find there.

And you think Playboy doesn't influence MTV videos and movies? Anyway, you're mixing media targetted at men and media targetted at women. The images of beauty targetted at women, IMO, are far more harmful, with almost nothing of benefit to the woman.

You know that Marylin Monroe could not get in Playboy today, don't you? Playboy doesn't accept models with natural breasts.

[Jethro83]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
Some of us don't have the luxury of having a significant other. So what else do we do?

Keep looking. I still haven't found her yet either, but I'm not disheartened just yet.

[Ming]

Originally posted by LordAzreal
People who go off and pose nude, or have sex in front of the camera obviously don't know the meaning of trust, or love. Apart from their love of quick cash.

You are welcome to your opinion, but don't try to impress it on others. HOW THE HECK do you know what they think or feel.
They are people too... And the relationships they have with their lovers IS NO DIFFERENT than yours. You are against pornography... fine. I can respect that. But don't try to cram your ideas of morality on the rest of us. You don't have to buy it, or pose for it... But don't even try to paint those involved as people who don't understand the meaning of trust or love.
People just have different opinions on it then you do...

How arrogant on your part

[Jethro83]

Originally posted by Ming




You are welcome to your opinion, but don't try to impress it on others. HOW THE HECK do you know what they think or feel.
They are people too... And the relationships they have with their lovers IS NO DIFFERENT than yours. You are against pornography... fine. I can respect that. But don't try to cram your ideas of morality on the rest of us. You don't have to buy it, or pose for it... But don't even try to paint those involved as people who don't understand the meaning of trust or love.
People just have different opinions on it then you do...

How arrogant on your part

Sorry about that. I was wrong. I wasn't thinking. I don't want to cram my ideas on anybody else, and I accept opinions of others. And I don't normally make assumptions, or pass judgement and I don't know how the said people feel. I could just kick my own butt for saying what has obviously made me sound so arrogant. Rest assured that it will never happen again.

Though I still don't think highly of porno, I don't want to stop anyone who wants to buy it, look at it, or even take part in it themselves. Its entirely up to them.

[MrFun]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Furthermore, I would like to point out that VS is primarily targeted at women, and is only incidentally a visual aid for men.
[QUOTE]

How much more convenient can you get for hetero men??

[Kaak]

I think excessive pornography corrupts the mind, and offer my roommate as proof.

[chequita guevara]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by MrFun
[QUOTE] Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Furthermore, I would like to point out that VS is primarily targeted at women, and is only incidentally a visual aid for men.

How much more convenient can you get for hetero men??

Well let's see, it shows up free in the mail . . .

[ZoboZeWarrior]

Originally posted by David Floyd
Is it really a danger to children, or do right wing Christian-types blow it out of proportion?

Discuss - and I'd love to see Dr. Strangelove's opinion...

It endanger the kids by the way that it teach them a very phalocratic sex. Male complete domination, false female representation and no feeling.

But it teach whatever sex, that's very important for kids.

More clever & realistic sexual education is better than a porn through.

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Ming




You are welcome to your opinion, but don't try to impress it on others. HOW THE HECK do you know what they think or feel.
They are people too... And the relationships they have with their lovers IS NO DIFFERENT than yours. You are against pornography... fine. I can respect that. But don't try to cram your ideas of morality on the rest of us. You don't have to buy it, or pose for it... But don't even try to paint those involved as people who don't understand the meaning of trust or love.
People just have different opinions on it then you do...

How arrogant on your part

Well many people look at it as degrading, but I suppose it beats working in a sh*tty factory for pay and conditions. Which one is the most degrading? A lifestyle decision my friends, a lifestyle decision. I hate to say this, but I, erm, agree with Ming

The AMA (American Medical Association) released a study last year that showed that men between 35-60 had a lower risk of heart attack and lower blood pressure if they masturbated daily. It is also a good way to lower stress and promote sleep (women already knew this).

Think about it logically, what is life about? Reproduction! You must keep the machine in working order or else it gets rusty.

[Provost Harrison]

That's my risk of heart disease decreased

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
That's my risk of heart disease decreased

ditto....

AND ANYONE WHO SAYS THEY DON'T IS EITHER LYING OR IMPOTENT.

[Alynzia]

I know nobody is interested in what I think but what a load of poo about men having unrealistic expectations.

Men see normal women everyday. They have some concept of what their parents looked like. A mating couple. I mean yeah, we all live in little boxes and only ever see porn stars. We have no experience beyond that?

Most men have access to a mirror. If a young man is really sexy he should expect very beautiful women to fall for him. If he looks like the guys on Apolyton then he should not

If you watch pornographic video material and the girls are not airbrushed there, I can promise you. Guys who watch porn are not intimidated by the men with huge... things... they don't expect to look like that themselves. They have seen the shower room and know what is normal.

I still don't get why men play with themselves when there are so many more heterosexual females than heterosexual males.
It is a case that they would rather DIY than sleep with a girl who is not extremely beautiful, according to my brother.

Alynzia.

See my signature, look what Hollywood did to me! I can only fancy bald men over 50

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Alynzia
Most men have access to a mirror. If a young man is really sexy he should expect very beautiful women to fall for him. If he looks like the guys on Apolyton then he should not

Hey, don't treat me like the rest of these ugly bastards

Well why is there such a taboo over masturbation, I mean it is perfectly healthy. If it wasn't for masturbation, I'd probably be in a padded cell by now...

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Alynzia
I still don't get why men play with themselves when there are so many more heterosexual females than heterosexual males.
It is a case that they would rather DIY than sleep with a girl who is not extremely beautiful, according to my brother.

Well that is the theory, but things have never quite worked out like that for me alas. There's something about the way I act or the way I am or the way I look which seems to repel a lot of females. My nervousness about all things sexual doesn't help either.

[ZoboZeWarrior]

Originally posted by MrFun
The more comfortable a society becomes in tolerating, or even encouraging children before their teen years in viewing pornography, the closer they get to eventually accepting pedophilia. At least, the risk is there -- not absolute.

Why ?

Me think they could become gay if they didn't watch porn before 15 !



Xuse, silly provocation.

[Seeker]

"I only fancy bald men over 50"

****ing old guys, getting all the girls...

When will they learn to just die and go away and leave all their women and high-paying jobs to the next generation??

[Provost Harrison]

Yeah, what is it with this fascination of women with 'over-the-hill' blokes. I'll never understand it.

[Mercator]

Yeah, what is it with this fascination of women with 'over-the-hill' blokes. I'll never understand it.

You'll be glad when you finally meet "the one" when you're 50!


(nevermind, I'm having the same problem)

[Provost Harrison]

50? Hmmm...

[Mercator]

Look at it from the bright side... You're almost half way.

*makes calculations about own situation*
*drops dead*

[MrFun]

Originally posted by ZoboZeWarrior




Why ?

Me think they could become gay if they didn't watch porn before 15 !



Xuse, silly provocation.

If you read my later posts, you would notice that I delcared my arguments null and void.

Nevertheless, in spite of my lack of argument to support my reason why, I still do not see any need for preteen kids to have access to pornography.

And for your other point -- there's nothing wrong with developing into a gay or bisexual.

[drake]

Society accepts young kids going to movies in which hundreds of people are shot and mutilated, but when a girl shows her ti ts, oh boy, look out, thats un-acceptable! Heaven forbid a woman shows her ***** or a guy shows his ****.

"Oh no, its a VAGINA, hide your eyes kids!"
"Its a PENIS! Close your eyes kids, you'll be scarred for life!"
"Oh, it's people getting their heads blown off, go ahead and watch kids!"

Sex is a healthy part of humanity. Theres nothing wrong with it, or dirty. Pornography like many things, can become a source of addiction, but when used in moderation, quite a healthy thing. It allows the lonely, bored, or just plain horny to get off without having to go to a crummy dive bar to look for some tail or blow a bunch of cash on an overpriced whore. Also, one doesnt have to settle for getting laid by someone who would look better with a bag on their head.

Alynzia posed the question about why do guys play with themselves when theres a bunch of women out there. Well how about posing the same question about women? Surely while its a much lesser percentage, there are plenty of women that masturbate, and yes, some do like porn! Not necessarily the real nasty rough stuff, but there is quite a large market for females in the industry.

So why aren't these chicks going out and finding guys to service them Alynzia?

The obvious answer is that, while, yeah most people can get laid if they really want to, they dont want to make the effort. Why? Because no one knows how to please you better than you. Why mess with this nasty dirtbag, when you know you can get off well by your lonesome? With minimal effort, time and money!

And last I checked, no one ever got the clap from a videotape. Or pregnant.

I'd let my kid watch porn at 13 or 14 if he wanted to. I wouldn't get it for him, but I wouldn't confiscate any magazines that he got or anything. Some porno magz have given me some of the best pointers on bringing a woman to orgasm. I'd also rather have him find out about sex that way than experimenting with a girl at that age.

Again, the only problem with porn is the problem that the Conservative religious moral "holier than thou' people make it. The general idea of censorship isn't that different from the Spanish Inquisition. Their idea is "It's not enough that we prevent our own kids or other people from viewing pornography. We think its evil and God wants us to outlaw it."

And please, I'm not talking about all conservatives here, so don't flame me.

[Sirotnikov]

Alynzia, it's effortless and free to play with our selves.

Getting women, however, is difficult, tricky and sometimes expensive (I mean dinner an a movie, wise guys )



- almost 18 white male virgin

[chequita guevara]

You don't treat yourself to dinner and movie first? Man, you guys are easy.