|
|
Post by Weyland on Aug 22, 2012 10:33:55 GMT
I assume that's in Blackfriars? If so, I hope so. In any case, I'll try to make a few posts on there before then - I always find it hard to get into a messageboard: I like to know the undercurrents and relationships of the people there before I go piling in. Details: 15:00 SATURDAY 22nd SEPTEMBER 2012
Blackfriar Pub
174 Queen Victoria Street, London, EC4V 4EGLooks like an unwise choice, trendy pub at peak boozing time on a Saturday afternoon in central London, but the organiser talks of booking a space, so it would be nice if I could tell him how many are interested. |
|
|
|
Post by everso on Aug 22, 2012 10:43:06 GMT
I shall only be staying for a couple of hours, so won't require any food.
|
|
|
|
Post by Weyland on Aug 22, 2012 10:48:28 GMT
I shall only be staying for a couple of hours, so won't require any food. Did you know that Myky is asking for PMs from attenders? |
|
|
|
Post by aubrey on Aug 22, 2012 12:23:31 GMT
Last one: rapists can get their ideas from anywhere (even 50 Shades); in any case, rapists and sex criminals in general are far more likely to come from a sexually repressive than a sexually liberal background. In countries where porn is suddenly liberalised, cases of sexual assault go down. This has happened a lot. Porn is not any harder now - some of the grindhouse films of the 70s were incredibly scuzzy - but it is more available. Without blocking a lot of stuff that very few people would consider porn (sex education sites, sites for gay teenagers, sexual health sites, sites showing artworks) you can't stop porn: the only way of countering some of the unrealistic ideas in some porn is education. And boys had some weird ideas about sex back when I was young, as well, and the only porn was Health and Efficiency (which was just starting to show pubic hair (before then all women in that type of mag were sexless: no hair, no genitals) and the Freeman's catalogue And porn is not a men v. women thing: women like porn as well. Here is a piece about what you can (and can't) learn from porn:
Pornography is not meant to be sex education. It’s fiction, period.
Nevertheless, with the enforced ignorance of abstinence-only sex “education,” most families’ and couples’ discomfort discussing sex seriously, and mainstream Christianity’s taboos about sexual reality, most people find themselves needing more information about sexuality.
If they’re fortunate, they manage to find a smart book or two, a reliable website or two, and maybe even an enlightened, open-minded, communicative sex partner. Anyone lacking all three who wants sex information inevitably turns to porn, whether intentionally or unconsciously.
Unfortunately, many young people don’t realize that porn is not a documentary. Lacking porn literacy or media literacy, they’re ignorant about editing, off-camera preparation, and other normal features of film-making. While some people assume that sex is—or should be—like what they see in porn, every good sex educator cautions against this. The most recent set of caveats comes from my good friend, journalist and sex educator Michael Castleman.
While I agree with most of his excellent article (I’ve said similar things myself over and over), let’s not forget the helpful things consumers can learn from porn.
This is NOT, NOT, NOT to say that everything people learn from porn is good. Puh-leeze—any 17-year-old who thinks his next girlfriend is dying for anal sex or a chance to blow the pizza delivery guy is in for a shock. And it’s always too bad when men think most women climax from 90 seconds of intercourse (although the antidote is pretty straightforward: simply telling a guy ‘that’s not me,’ no apology necessary).
That said, here’s a reminder of helpful things that porn can teach us about sex.
WAIT, ONE MORE TIME: I know, I know—porn also contains many inaccurate, even egregious lessons. But if we take them seriously—and, fortunately, not every porn consumer believes the fantasies of porn—let’s also take the following positive helpful lessons seriously. Many of these are positive lessons sex educators have been teaching for years:
Men can touch their penises during sex;
Women can touch their vulvas during sex
Spit works for lube
Some women sometimes desire sex without romance
Telling each other stories can make sex hotter
Men can climax using their own hand
Some women think about sex in advance
Women sometimes insert the penis into their vagina
Men sometimes insert their penis into a vagina
If the penis comes out during intercourse, you can simply put it back in
Some women like fellatio
Some women like cunnilingus
Some men like fellatio
Some men like cunnilingus
Some women like anal sex
Some men like anal sex
Vulvas can look really different from each other
Some women use and enjoy vibrators and dildos
Some men like their balls squeezed during sex
Pregnant women can be sexual
Whether during intercourse, oral, or manual sex, the clitoris can be important
The volume of ejaculate is not related to penis size
Sex is more than penis-vagina intercourse
Some women have orgasms
Some older women are sexual
Older women can be attractive to younger men (and vice versa)
People can have sex with people of different races
People can smile and talk to each other during sex
People can indicate to each other what they like during sex
Some women shave/wax, others don’t
You can happily ejaculate outside a vagina (onto a leg, chest, butt, belly, lower-back tattoo, or your own hand)
WHATEVER your sexual fantasy, you’re not the only one who has it
The last one is possibly the most important; it has been very helpful to many gay people. Whether Scottish corner shops sell hard core: that depends on what your definition of hardcore is. I've seen US magazines (like Swank)in newsagents here that look hardcore, but which are not. (My definition is that you see it go in; some people have a lower level, and some a higher. Obviously, mine is the right one.) |
|
|
|
Post by Weyland on Aug 22, 2012 12:44:21 GMT
Whether Scottish corner shops sell hard core: that depends on what your definition of hardcore is. I've seen US magazines (like Swank)in newsagents here that look hardcore, but which are not. (My definition is that you see it go in; some people have a lower level, and some a higher. Obviously, mine is the right one.) I've a feeling yours is mine, which obviously confirms its rightness. I could give you Riot's definition (which is in the thread I linked in any case), but a) You wouldn't believe it. b) She'd say I was sneering laddishly. c) It includes stuff that would be at home in the Daily Mail. |
|
|
|
Post by aubrey on Aug 22, 2012 12:52:47 GMT
The second post transplant clinic today. My creatine level is down (all I know is that down is good), and I may have to have some BP tablets. My toes are numb - they have been numb for 4-5 years, but now it's worse. No idea why. I think I feel fine, but then have to walk very slowly, with many rests. But it's coming.
|
|
|
|
Post by jean on Aug 22, 2012 13:05:22 GMT
I don't think much of that one. |
|
|
|
Post by Weyland on Aug 22, 2012 13:19:02 GMT
I don't think much of that one. Too much Not enough detail.  |
|
|
|
Post by jean on Aug 22, 2012 13:29:24 GMT
Replace can be with is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Weyland on Aug 22, 2012 13:44:57 GMT
Thank you, Jean. Who'd've thought it?! The things one learns on SC. [Trouble is, SC is fast turning into pornography. By some definitions.] |
|
|
|
Post by jean on Aug 22, 2012 14:58:36 GMT
You knew already.
Now, about those toes of aubreys's...?
|
|
|
|
Post by Weyland on Aug 22, 2012 15:39:00 GMT
You knew already. Now, about those toes of aubreys's...? I quite often have numb toes, seemingly at random. Used to bother me, but doesn't seem to be much more than an occasional nuisance. Like the occasional sneezing fits (record -- 14 blasts). Not that I'm any authority. The trending blame factors are kiwi fruit and William "Mekon" Hague. |
|
|
|
Post by bonbonlarue on Aug 22, 2012 20:13:11 GMT
I like sex. It's taken me 54 years to find a partner who likes it as much as I do, who is totally open and honest and we laugh. A lot. 50 shades of grey??? Old news baby.....  |
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Aug 22, 2012 20:59:11 GMT
If you seriously don't accept that porn causes harm, you should maybe read some testimonies from rape victims Who, me? You clearly haven't read my posts. Again. As for corner shops selling hard-core pornography, I just don't believe it. They don't in England at any rate. Note that I'm not calling you a liar. Any news on the sneering/liar front? Nope mate. Only thing i have in terms of things to look at what you're saying are logic and the English language. And, using these limited tools (of logic and the English language) you're calling me (and SWL) liars. Wasn't even a neutral situation. There were sides to be taken on this very trivial side issue. And you chose to side with the 'lads' and call me and SWL liars. In terms of the arc of the debate meaningless. In terms of our friendship . . interesting. |
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Aug 22, 2012 21:20:37 GMT
Last one: rapists can get their ideas from anywhere (even 50 Shades); Absolutely. Nobody is saying that porn is the only cause of rape. Absolutely. Never even thought about that. Interesting. Any evidenced or is it just a hunch? Does it? Does it really? All I've ever seen in terms of evidence for this assertion is a questionable single study from Croatia. / So interested to see what you're basing that assertion on. I think it is. And I think that the harder stuff (whether harder or not than in previous years) is FAR FAR more accessible. In the, say, 70s or 80s, if you wanted to see forced anal sex (say) you had to track down a specialist supplier. Now you can get it on the internet instantly, without any trouble (and also in shops in Scotland, but I may just be lying about that.) So yes, I think it's harder, and even if I'm wrong, there's no denying it's more instantly accessible. I absolutely know that I can't stop porn. Furthermore, I'm sufficiently liberal that i would never try to ban it. But I don't think I'm wrong to raise it as an issue, to wonder about it, to consider the affects it has on young men, and on sexual violence, and suggest that we, as a whole, might usefully question and address it as opposed to just rolling over and accepting it happily as a sign of how hugely liberated we are. Yes. There are interesting questions and discussions to be had about male (and indeed female) sexuality and how we fuck it up variously. Every sexual human being enjoys sexual stimulus (be it 50 Shades, or porn). And art should celebrate and show and enjoy this wonderful sexuality. The point is that the gendered and abusive nature of modern pornography should make any reasonable person question it, and think there might be something we've not quite got right. For various reasons, I can't be bothered reading that just now. Sorry. I will the next time I log on. Absolutely. Sex Education has to be factual, based on safety and harm-reduction, etc. Porn is sexual fantasy. They are two completely different things. But the nature of current porn, and how that sexual fantasy is sold to the masses is what is currently concerning. It's not the existence of pornography; it's the nature of it. Mmm. I disagree that most people find themselves needing more information. I suspect that most people get out there and shag away and find that it's far more fun as a participative sport than a spectator one, and that they don't need porn to have orgasms. But I have no evidence for this, and maybe most people are more repressed than I give them credit for. Same point really. No, I don't think most people struggle that hard to do lots of shagging. I don't think 'porn literacy' is a real thing, and, even if it was, maybe if people (mainly men, but some women) didn't lack consent literacy, and non-performance-related recreational pleasure literacy, then 'porn literacy' wouldn't be necessary. Porn is not an inevitable or necessary element in healthy relationships. Not to say that porn can't be part of a healthy relationship, but plenty of healthy relationships survive without it and I resent your attempt to make pornography integral to sexuality and intimacy. Then you got kind of list-based and icky and I'm no longer having the discussion. X |
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Aug 22, 2012 21:21:32 GMT
Whether Scottish corner shops sell hard core: that depends on what your definition of hardcore is. I've seen US magazines (like Swank)in newsagents here that look hardcore, but which are not. (My definition is that you see it go in; some people have a lower level, and some a higher. Obviously, mine is the right one.) I've a feeling yours is mine, which obviously confirms its rightness. I could give you Riot's definition (which is in the thread I linked in any case), but a) You wouldn't believe it. b) She'd say I was sneering laddishly. c) It includes stuff that would be at home in the Daily Mail. Bullshit from a - c. |
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Aug 22, 2012 21:22:52 GMT
I like sex. It's taken me 54 years to find a partner who likes it as much as I do, who is totally open and honest and we laugh. A lot. 50 shades of grey??? Old news baby..... I celebrate this. Sex in real life is great. |
|
|
|
Post by Weyland on Aug 23, 2012 9:06:45 GMT
And, using these limited tools (of logic and the English language) you're calling me (and SWL) liars. I didn't. You seem to see a lot of things in life as battles, with sides. All I do is struggle through, noting facts, meeting people, and having a laugh. I didn't call anyone a liar. What it all boiled down to was that I didn't agree with your -- frankly ridiculous -- definition of pornography. I couldn't exactly "side" with that. It's all in the thread, as you know, and I won't embarass you by dragging out the details -- such as the above-mentioned definition -- yet again. |
|
|
|
Post by Weyland on Aug 23, 2012 9:14:24 GMT
I've a feeling yours is mine, which obviously confirms its rightness. I could give you Riot's definition (which is in the thread I linked in any case), but a) You wouldn't believe it. b) She'd say I was sneering laddishly. c) It includes stuff that would be at home in the Daily Mail. Bullshit from a - c. OK. So why don't you give us your definition here? |
|
|
|
Post by aubrey on Aug 23, 2012 12:05:43 GMT
We obviously don't live in the same world.
I don't think we really disagree that much, Riot. I don't like modern porn either. It's all the same. I do like old porn - which is how I know about it - and all porn is obviously more available these days.
I don't think porn is Necessary, or that everyone should have to use it.
My definition of porn is: if someone uses it to get off on, then it's porn. What might be porn for one person does not have to be for someone else. So, the Freeman's catalogue (a porn forum I am on has a thread devoted to catalogues), certain TV sports, Ballet, have all been used as pornography.
Porn prosecutions have never taken the intent of the material into account: the prosecution has been based on what it could be used for. The Dangerous Pictures Act (not its official name) could be used to prosecute images from mainstream films, if it is decided that they are being used as porn (with the result that you will never know if you are in possession of Dangerous Pictures or not until you are prosecuted).
The cases of sex crimes going down in places where porn has been legalised has been noticed in Denmark, and in some US states, amongst other. It might not be causal - it might be something else. I have seen this cited a lot, and I'll have a look for it late. Same with the repressed upbringing more likely leading to sex criminals thing - again, I'll have a look.
I don't think that rape has much to do with sex anyway: and rapists' lawyers will often use porn as mitigation. That doesn't mean that porn had anything to do with the crimes. As for victims saying that rapists would use porn language: it's not just porn language, it's kind of universal: I've heard that kind of language used in all sorts of films and TV dramas.
The definition of hardcore. The portrayal of erections has never been illegal here: the main distributors of mags (Smith and Menzies) don't like them, and that's the only reason why you never saw them until relatively recently, and that usually in imported mags: which can seem hardcore if you don't look too closely.
I'm off to get something to eat now.
|
|
