Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
i think i want to read that book and change my...erm....habits.
not that i'm always doing my habits....just like, once or twice a month....but i'm starting to feel that those habits are hypocritical when you take in my stances on other things. if ya dig?
She talks about it like everyone in the world is getting off on a four-way involving power drills and gasmasks.
I don't really even know what she's suggesting - ban porn? How's that going to work?
I know Theo’s set up a porn server in his flat the size of a NASA control centre that requires goggles and a labcoat to enter due to the sheer volume of round-the-clock violent porn being downloaded, but the rest of us just keep things to the odd badly-shot stick film and get on with our lives
what an image
Way too much silcon, piercings and tattoos about these days. Watching a porno these days is like watching Mad Max fuck.
Nanny state BS
probably more like violent videogames or tv i'd say. Most normal people with a bit of common sense can tell the difference between fantasy and reality, but there's always some fuckwit who thinks it's ok to stick it in her poo hole and jizz all over her face without asking, cause he 'saw it in a movie'/
"'scuse me love, would you mind terribly if i put this here up your bum and then splurged in your eye?"
"In 2007, a comment stream on the website Jezebel.com included a number of women who said that, on a first date, they had, to their surprise, experienced their sexual partner ejaculating on their faces without asking."
Surely they had SOME warning...
Those men are amateurs. It's much hotter when the woman DEMANDS you come on her face. Just like in porn.
Between the darkness and the peripheral vision, no way are you going to anticipate it when a guy decides to stand on his seat halfway through Hot Tub Time Machine and nut in your eye
SAFETY WINK, ALL THE SAFETY WINKS
"From studying thousands of porn films and images Dines found that the most popular acts depicted in internet porn include vaginal, oral and anal penetration by three or more men at the same time; double anal; double vaginal; a female gagging from having a penis thrust into her throat; and ejaculation in a woman's face, eyes and mouth."
NB: The most popular search terms on Wankspider.com today are "German", "BBW" and... uh, "Jerk Off Encouragement". Or... so I heard somewhere...
2 Jul 2010, 8:21AM
"Thank you for this brilliant article. Pornography is hate speech, and profoundly anti-sex and anti-human, and the complacent mainstream needs to wake up to that."
I agree! If porn needs anything nowadays it's more humans and more sex.
2 Jul 2010, 9:01AM
"...Too often those people who raise concerns and criticisms of the multi-billion dollar, capitalist porn industry..."
"around the world women and children are being profoundly affected by this industry - many of whom have no voice..."
"it is indeed not something we should leave in the hands of woman-hating, racist capitalists."
The course is clear: Make porn a not-for-profit activity. Amateur Interracial 18+ dirty talk videos for all!
2 Jul 2010, 9:21AM
"What's worse is when walking down the country street of small town UK you see 12-18 year old girls dressed in porn outfits that assault the public with their aggression and blatant, no apology for flaunting/competing with internet whores. One 17 yr. old girl who was wearing a see through white bikini and high heels as all she wore, casually walked to a car park with her dad, unaware of the shock and horror of what was being seen."
but there seems to be a fair few flaws in her argument (which are perhaps addressed elsewhere, for all I know). I'm not quite sure why she sees a causal link between proliferation of pornography and an increase in cases of anal rape (the article presents no hard evidence of that, but I'll give it the benefit of the doubt) when she's provided no real reason to. Off the top of my head I could think of various other alleged social ills that could be attributed to.
I think there's a fair amount to be said for the argument that pornography stunts emotional development, but other studies suggests that leads to a lack of libido and impotence across the majority of men affected, rather than an increased desire for extreme sex.
I think all of these conclusions rest on the premise that porn didn't exist before 1972.
Rule 34 has been in existence since the dawn of time.
I think her bedrock premise that it's twisting everyone's sex lives is bunk.
Who's generation do you think has a healthier attitude to sex – ours or our grandparents? Especially with regard to women - does she think her grandma had more sexual choice and assertiveness?
My grandma once asserted that Freddie Ljungberg was "a poofter" because he was rocking that red mohawk.
...but then my other gran was one of my granddad's three (or was it four) wives.
So in conclusion: I don't know.
I am all for the proliferation of DIY porn - the sooner all my adult entertainment is provided by amateurs without the abysmal discourses of male-on-female domination provided by 90% of straight porn, the better. I'm increasingly finding myself watching as much gay as straight porn, because it's less forced and more natural. Two people making love is hot no matter what gender they are. It's a naturally erotic act, it's possible to find the act attractive without being drawn to the humans involved.
That all straight commercial porn ever ends in a facial cumshot is absolutely repellent.
Sure, it can be read as misogynistic, degrading and domineering. But then some sexual pyschology suggests that the male obsession with ejaculating on/in a woman's face is the result of a desire for acceptance, having been told from childhood that their bits and everything they do are somehow nasty or dirty.
The point is that a facial cumshot frames the entire act around the man's orgasmic cycle. A more discreet, internal cumshot allows for a far more mutual discourse. Spunking in her face on camera* is basically 'LOVE ME AND MY CUM, O SPONGE'
It's like sure they strip, she blows him, he SOMETIMES licks her out a bit, they fuck in 2 positions, a bit of anal, cumshot, end. Offensively dull.
*doing it in private is another thing entirely, and can often be fucking amazing for both parties, especially if you're simultaneously wanking off on her and giving her a handjob
Why would a basic human desire for acceptance, to not feel dirty, to not feel like a fundamental human is horrid or a violation, be repellent?
I'm not sure you can make such a clean distinction between what is fine in private and what isn't in public, as it were. Dines' argument suggests that pornography is twisiting 'normal' sexual activity out of shape, but you seem to have tacitly agreed that something like a facial cumshot is popular largely because it's a subconscious sexual desire.
then it's a projected insecurity, which is surely unhealthy? If you need to have your male actor spadging on your female actor's face in order to feel fulfilled, you've failed as a porn director IMO.
The IRL facial cumshots are almost always suggested or at least enthusiastically agreed-to by the woman - in private it can give them a huge erotic thrill as well. It's just the way it's done more than anything in commercial porn - the woman mutely waiting for the load to be deposited. Anyway, I don't do the face thing often - it's just a means to vary it up every now and then, and I wouldn't dream of forcing it on anyone who wasn't completely up for it. I don't think it's porn-derived either - a female friend suggested I try it with my partner and we both liked it, so I've done it subsequently.
Dines is right that porn is changing certain things for some men (and women), though. Expecting anal sex, for one. Really one shouldn't - I have to confess I've possibly asked previous partners a little too keenly for such experimentation.
because otherwise every single one of us is a shambling, sallow-checked goner. But what I was essentially getting at is that the facial cumshot is not universally morally repellent, be it within pornography or in more private spheres. Perhaps it's best we agree to disagree on that matter.
I'm unwilling to accept that pornography is bending normal sexual activity out of shape, because I'm unsure (and unable to see how anyone could be sure) of what the predicates 'normal' or 'natural' really mean in this context. Factor in the fact that anecdotal evidence is not always especially compelling, and I'm really not sold on Dines' argument.
they'd be more inclined to ask rather than just expect.
It's not always that pleasant.
Isn't that part of the reason it's prevalent in so much pornography? Because lots of men know it's not something they'll ever do in real life, and so they enjoy it vicariously instead?
It probably isn't a pleasant physical sensation, but I don't think that's why anyone would find it to be a repellent part of porn culture ...
Its universality is, however. As I say, it can be great, but when it's routine, it loses its erotic thrill and becomes woman-subjugating discourse.
I do think in some cases Dines has a point, although I'd need to attend one of her lectures to be able to give specifics.
I think Dines makes decent points and, more importantly, asks decent questions. She also makes huge jumps in logic, imo.
The questions are more important than the answers, because the answers vary so much in different cases, and there's also a large degree of subjectivity involved.
Also, I'm simply not sure whether my um eclectic taste in bedroom play is the result of having an inquisitive, restless mind or seeing this stuff in porn and wanting to replicate it. More importantly, I can't speak for others in this regard. Anyone who wants violent sex and forces it on their partner is a cunt, though.
to why people like blowjob/facials in porn.
eye contact and expressions, two things missing from all but the most terrifying vaginas, breasts and bottoms.
if the woman doesn't enjoy it then it isn't hot, it's grim.
but yeah - to violate the bond of eye-contact with an unwanted spunkload of dismissiveness would probably give any woman a horrible feeling of emotional AND sexual rejection.
would be that pornography gives a false impression of how much woman enjoy giving oral sex, and so stunts intimacy and emotional development.
But I agree with what I think you're getting at ... Male enjoyment of oral sex is just as much about the feeling of acceptance (the idea that a woman would actively enjoy pleasuring you, to the point where she derived a sense of sexual pleasure from it herself) as it is the physical sensation.
Just realised I've said male when it obviously works both ways ...
many women do enjoy giving oral sex, just like many men enjoy giving it to women... it IS a turn on for both people... it's SEX...
sure some people probably aren't into oral, and i genuinely pity them. how can oral sex stunt intimacy? it's one of the most personal/intimate things you can do to someone.
it's not like you get brain-washed by porn, you can still tell the difference between a fuck and loving sex; at the best of times it's a combination of the two.
"I'm increasingly finding myself watching as much gay as straight porn, because it's less forced..."
seriously try finding good straight porn on xtube - it really fucken isn't easy. v rewarding when it does happen (for a few fleeting minutes)
The incongruity arising from asserting that BUMMING is less FORCED was my implication.
...and what kind of amateur uses xtube, anyway?
but the obvious emotional and sexual attraction between the participants
youporn, redtube and xhamster are all the same - xtube is a bit bigger so it wins. Beyond that, I'm not paying for my jerkfodder.
Good lord, you're worse than Theo!
I'd post others but im at work and can't remember any.
it's not THAT good, sheesh
is clearly the right answer.
And if so, then I advise yuo to check out Squirt Gangbang as it's quite possibly the least sexual I have ever seen a group of naked women playing with themselves and each other ever be.
It's as repellent as any other bukkake but there's no male-female dominance.
If by 'gay' you mean 'all men' then what porn have you been watching? (genuine interest) As all the gay male porn i've watched has generally involved some form of 'force' or dominance play. And that's not any niche stuff, that's the mainstream crap punted out by Bel Ami, Titan and Falcon.
and usually by the ones who take pride in male beauty, rather than seek to subjugate it
Lesbian porn almost ALWAYS gives off the sensation of two women on a bed with an unseen male cock pointed at them like a semiautomatic rifle. "Dildos! Fuck each other like men! You're doing it for US!"
The only lesbian porn I really dig is sensual, subtle stuff. Tribadism >>>>>>>>>>>>> dildos by SUCH a long way. Actually, dildo porn is an instant turn-off in my book.
There's a few all female flicks or clips I've seen that are hugely erotic either by dint of self filming or the women involved were 'real' and not actresses and having filmed sex with their current partner. No men involved. Nina Hartley directed stuff is generally quite good for all female scenes as well.
I'll (most) probably check out xtube later on this weekend depending on what's going on.
If I could get it for free it's literally all I'd want or need
we all have those days ;)
By feminist porn, do you mean porn where two women just have a boring conversation for 10 minutes whilst lightly stroking each other?
Or this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6EprD9uIe9E
The latter? I've not seen 30 Rock before - that clip does kinda play on a stereotype or two.
I've seen it. It wasn't.
Lots of gratuitous gyno shots, too - which I'm personally not that into.
Much sexier to look at their facial expressions and their full-body movements than just their crotch. This is true of all porn.
Oh yeah, another bugbear: porn that focuses only on the rhythmic pumping of genitalia. LAME.
which is much hotter than straight porn where she fake moans for 20 minutes then the guy comes on her. Actually watching a woman actually enjoying herself is hot.
You're right, though. Actually, solo female porn is often great. Definitely underrated.
the straight stuff is a bit BRIT LADS FUCK IN IBIZA though...
It's full of cunts.
YOU SUCK, MCBAIN!
“I’m a neurotic nerd who likes to sleep with little girls.”
The way the pornography industry is structured tends to be the problem rather than all pornography in and of itself. Banning pornography isn't a realistic or desirable goal; rather changing peoples' attitudes to what is acceptable pornography (if such a think is possibly - i suppose by getting people to confront what it is they're watching and why they are watching it rather than telling them they shouldn't get off over porn).
The Internet also allows those with the taste for it to find MORE tasteful porn, more naturalistic porn, less staged porn by people who do it for themselves because they get off on it outside of the porn industry.
Would be interested to hear peoples' attitudes to how women view porn and what effect that is having on sexuality in general. Anecdotally, I've noticed more and more women seem to watch porn but maybe I just have a weird bunch of friends.
i'm not entirely convinced by the stuff about extreme acts in terms of whether they are a new thing, whether we have a right to judge them being copied in private relationships, or whether an enjoyment of seeing them depicted in porn/doing them yourselves automatically = a hatred of women or whatever. it would seem to me the very reason that some people find them arousing is precisely because they are taboo, something people would never do, never dare to do, and are perhaps even repelled by.
i am fully aware that lots of porn is abhorrent, sexist and frankly disgusting. it's just with the proliferation of porn and a certain liberation in how freely we can talk about sexuality now, it seems like this sort of generalised argument about pornography isn't really helping to change attitudes and question how and why porn functions in our society which are probably more likely to make positive benefits to our shared sexualities than banning it or saying it's all sick and wrong do...
or are you just having a dig at my vague defense of some porn.
genuinely can't tell
but i still have no idea exactly what you're trying to say. sorry :(
but instead a normal group of females with normal libidos and access to the internet
also yeah there IS an allure in (non-violent or at least fully consensual) taboo stuff - how can there not be - but it's not to everyone's taste, and also it should be regarded much as the works of Anais Nin: erotic fiction
she's so adjectivey and 'sensual' but still makes me go weak at the knees.
AT LEAST WE CAN TURN OUR EXPERIENCES INTO A SITCOM AT THE END OF IT RIGHT
and there we have it.
she makes some ok points but, really some of them are pretty fucking terrible.
eg. "Sexual assault centres in US colleges have said that more women are reporting anal rape, which Dines attributes directly to the normalisation of such practices in pornograph". this point is shit without also providing information as to whether all types of rape are also increasing. also, attributing this rise to porn is obviously just conjecture (completely unprovable as well) and it could be quite easily blamed on attribute it to 1000 other things.
also: some of the best peices I have read about porn are here http://www.mcsweeneys.net/links/pornwriter/
'In a recent study, 80% of men said that the one sex act they would most like to perform is to ejaculate on a woman's face; in 2007, a comment stream on the website Jezebel.com included a number of women who said that, on a first date, they had, to their surprise, experienced their sexual partner ejaculating on their faces without asking.'
They post on a site called 'jezebel.com', give it up on the first date, then complain when men treat them like sluts?
THIS IS WHY I DON'T LIKE FEMINISTS.
I'll say this: sex on the first date between consenting adults doesn't mean there are no rules, and it CERTAINLY doesn't mean there are no standards of decorum and respect.
If you're going to act like a slut, don't complain when you're treated like one.
Or at least semi-consensual sex?
I mean, it's true right. They're wearing a short skirt which they didn't feel at all peer-pressured to wear, they're rancid pissed and they've just snogged you. Surely a bit of cock in their cunt is precisely what they need!
The article clearly said after a first date, there's no peer pressure as to what you wear when you go on a date. And you can't blame these guys for thinking the girls are sluts if they are putting out after one date.
Respect is earn't, it's not a given, why would I respect you if you put out after such a short amount amount of time? Respect yourself and others might respect you too.
And yes, you can have respect and be naked, but it's a bit less likely if you're naked while sucking the cock of some guy who you've just met.
And I didn't realise you were joking, I've heard people come out with far more ridiculous things and be totally serious about it.
I suppose it's acceptable for the man to fuck whoever he chooses whenever he wants, but if a girl wants to fuck she is a dirty whore slut and deserves to have cum dribbling from her eyeballs.
The guy's just as big a slut as her.
I guess you are just a prude?
seriously though, why is there any problem here? say, um maybe it was a first date between people who already knew each other? when would having sex become acceptable behaviour?
But in that case, I'd have thought the guy would have a bit more respect for the girl.
I'm not really a prude, I just don't like massive sluts, or females who act like the whole worlds against them.
judge actions on a case-by-case basis, rather than as sweeping generalisations. then everyone's happy, yeah?
By the information I was given in the article, yes I made some presumptions, but none were too much of a stretch.
Treat 'em like whores until they've proved they're not one?
That's pretty enlightened stuff, there...
Al I said is that if some random guy you've pulled and decided to fuck on your first date spunks all over your face, you shouldn't act too surprised.
You did say that, you just don't like how it sounds.
What basis do you have to conclude that sleeping with someone on a first date is whorish behaviour? I don't remember seeing any rule book around...
How far can this go? If a woman sleeps with me on a first date, can I slap her around a bit because I saw it in porn? Can I stick it in her butt without a by-your-leave?
And on the basis that if you've only had one date with someone, you probably don't know them well enough to trust that they aren't going to shoot their load on your face.
Maybe it's just me, but one date doesn't seem like a long enough time period to trust someone enough to sleep with them.
All I'm saying is that if you're going to sleep with people you hardly know, you can't be too surprised when some of them do things you weren't expecting.
This is all I'm trying to say.
to make a crude analogy. it's like saying that you shouldn't be surprised/outraged if some nice bloke you go for a drink with after a chat on the train suddenly turns round and waves a knife in your face after a couple of rounds or something.
i mean, essentially your condemning anyone who dares to do something so RISQUE as have sex on a first date to deserve to have their face cummed in if the bloke is that gross. that's fucking ridiculous, and stems from your prudery because there is plenty of fairly common sensical ettiquette on what reasonable consenting adults do.
DiS seems to attract some real puritanical types....
And I don't see spunking on someone's face as THAT big a faux-pa, I mean yeah, I wouldn't presume I'm allowed to do it, without asking, but most of the girls I know and have discussed it with don't seem to mind a massive amount.
Not to say I've spunked on all their faces, It's just something that came up while I was with a group of my female friends one time.
But maybe we're all just victims of the evil porn industry...
YOU'RE GETTING IT ON IN THE MISSIONARY POSITION OR SOMEONE IS SUCKING YOU OFF AND THEN YOU WHIP IT OUT AND SPAFF ALL OVER HER FACE.
I REALLY CAN'T THINK OF ANYTHING VAGUELY PLAUSIBLE THAT COULD BE MUCH WORSE. IT'S RIDICULOUSLY DEMEANING TO DO IT TO SOMEBODY WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW THEM VERY WELL AND YOU DON'T REALLY KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT WHAT TURNS THEM ON/OFF OR WHAT THEIR EXPECTATIONS FOR SEX ARE. ALL IT DOES IS SHOW YOU'RE A SELF OBSESSED INCONSIDERATE ALPHAMALE CUNT WHO HAS NO REGARD FOR OTHER PEOPLES' PLEASURE, FEELINGS, CONFIDENCE, EMPOWERMENT OR SELF-WORTH
LET'S JUST BE CLEAR IN CASE YOU ARE IN ANY DOUBT. IT'S NOT SOMETHING YOU'D PRESUME YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO DO. IT IS COMPLETELY UTTERLY UNACCEPTABLE AND YOU DESERVE TO HAVE YOUR DICK TWISTED OFF SLOWLY AND PAINFULLY IF YOU THINK OTHERWISE.
And if you dare go back to your - well you shouldn't be having sex with a stranger thing. Well - there is a pretty well established shared expectation of what normal people enjoy doing for common or garden sexual pleasure and cumming on their face is definitely not one of those things.
And if you think it's ok after all this discussion about it - you're not a victim of the porn industry, you're just a nasty inconsiderate fucking neanderthal.
hope this helps clear things up.
I wouldn't presume I'm allowed to do it.
But there are plenty of guys who do think it's ok, and if you are sleeping with someone you hardly know, why would you presume they're one of the ones who wouldn't do it.
I haven't felt this turned-on by you since I made that double-save ;)
"most of the girls I know and have discussed it with don't seem to mind A MASSIVE AMOUNT."
'I don't mind, it's better than having it in my mouth, I hate that'
And I'm betting more guys consider it more acceptable to spunk in someone's mouth than on their face.
that's because it really is
1. tell the girl you're going to cum a reasonable time before you get to the point of no return.
2. if she says she doesn't want you to cum in her mouth. pull out before you get to the point of no return.
3. finish yourself off or let her finish you off. cum on the sheets/on your underwear/not on skin or if you can help it on her clothes.
4. it's not a face/mouth two way choice.
replace girl with boy as applicable.
But yeah, ask them. Don't be afraid to communicate the sex-act orally. It won't ruin the moment at all. Do it right and it'll add to it!
Most folks prefer to have spunk fired into their mouth than across their face - not just tidier but it also appeals more to human instinct.
I didn't say I consider either any better/worse, just that a lot of guys probably do.
And believe it or not I do have a girlfriend who seems very happy with me. No need to act a prick.
more happy than if you came in her mouth?
And I only quoted that friend of mine to say that different people prefer different things.
will be REALLY happy about you posting her sexual preferences all over the internet!!!
it's gone from 'almighty schooling' to 'THERE IS NO ESCAPE NOW, STORMJH'
But backspaced it before I posted, because it made me look a bit weird.
RocknRollMassacre's guide to the ins and outs of receiving fellatio
BBC 3, 6:30PM.
TDT informs a terrifying percentage of my humour
it was meant to be all subtle and shit, but I guess it didn't work out
I only just realised! Too subtle. This thread has desensitised me :(
sorry, i just ruined EVERYTHING, and all for a bad pun *hangs head in shame*
I just got the pun.
You've forgotten your words already?
"If you're going to act like a slut, don't complain when you're treated like one."
On what basis have you determined that putting out on a first date is sluttish? And how does their slutty behaviour legitimise me doing something they might find degrading without consent?
Again: Where does it end? If a girl agrees to sleep with me on a first date, can she really be that surprised if I shit on her chest? What about a second date? What about after 3 years of marriage?
I think you need to meet more women, friend.
except yours has fewer grammatical errors. mens'? ugh, son
I rate yours purely for introducing the concept of Ethical Slut Magazine.
Need to subscribe to that shit...
I thought it was just a book...
I don't seem to see spunking on someone's face as a big a deal as some of you people do.
But to the one underneath.
I don't know what I'm replying to any more.
I wouldn't sweat it :D
I do aim to please (and sometimes to annoy).
But I'd just like to say, I'm not as big a cunt as I'm probably coming off in this thread.
Except this is nothing to do with whether it's a "big deal" or not.
You've made no attempt to explain what it is about this particular action makes it a big deal or not.
You've simply asserted that sleeping with a man on a first date makes you a slut - but have chosen not to back it up with any kind of rationale.
By your logic there are any number of things I can do to someone who sleeps with me on a first date and she has no call to get uppity about any of them because putting out on a first date makes her a slut.
If you can't appreciate how retarded that is, then you're beyond help.
to sleep with someone you don't know very well.
I feel sex is something you'd do with someone you have an emotional attachment to, the kind of emotional attachment that takes a bit longer than one date to form.
In some circumstances I entirely agree. But there's more libidinous, bestial element to human desire that sometimes wishes to be sated ASAP - and if the intellect is content that the sex will be respectful and mutually fulfilling, then the body should be allowed its way.
But if you are just after a quick fuck the surely you'd go to some crappy club get drunk and pick up some other drunk rather than on a date with someone? Surely a date is you wanting to get to know someone in the hopes that they're a good match for a relationship?
NO! Getting drunk and going to a crappy club is A way of doing it, but not a good one. Usually it's when two people meet at a bar, meet at a concert, or even arrange a date that rapidly reveals both parties as preferring sex to anything more meaningful. A date is all manner of things, but usually it's 'well I don't know what I want but here's a nice person and let's see what happens' - one shouldn't be presumptuous.
If I was just looking for sex id go pick some girl up in a club somewhere as opposed to asking someone out on a date, why go through the extra cost/trivialities associated with going on a date if all you're after is sex.
and who knows what else it might lead to?
The best dates are open-ended. You might never see each other again or wind up married.
And who says sex will be better with someone who you've eaten a meal or gone to the cinema with (that's such an awful idea for a date though, why would you want to go sit in silence with someone for 2 hours? what the hell is that achieving?)is going to be better than sex with some random?
when comparatively sober, and when you meet through shared interests
But who knows eh - it's often pot-luck. Just that if you've established a connection it can be that much more thrilling putting what you know of them into a sexual context. Drink optional.
Into a sexual context?
You've got small talk, so you probably know their hometown and if they have siblings and what bands they like, none of which I can see being too useful.
And you know what food they ordered, which I spose could come in helpful if you're into all that, but most people aren't.
I'm thinking getting to know someone over a longer period of time would be helpful, but I can't see one date being too much help.
Siblings and bands? That shit can wait the fuck up. I'm not saying you can just shoot the breeze about fucking straight out the gate but you can find out quite a goddamn lot about them if you ask the right questions and pick up their wavelength quickly enough. It's not like there's a script. You get a feel for them, for their sensuality, whether you want to or not. It's sheer animal magic.
"If you're going to act like a slut, don't complain when you're treated like one."
or is it just the non-consensual aspect that makes spunking on a girl's face treating them like a slut?
Like I've said, I wouldn't presume that the girl doesn't mind taking a load on the face.
I quote: "If you're going to act like a slut, don't complain when you're treated like one."
'Acting like a slut' in many mens' eyes incorporates dress, behaviour and all manner of little signs that don't *actually* take into account their sexual needs or preferences.
Conversely, I've met plenty of women who DO sleep on the first date if there's a healthy respect, if they like the guy and if it feels right. Naturally, as the respect is mutual, nobody is accusing anyone of being a slut. Unless they self-identify as one. Oh Ethical Slut, you sell so many copies!
Plus, if you think there's never any (tacit) peer-pressure in dressing up for a date...
Well why would their be peer pressure? It's only you and your date who are going to take an notice to your outfit.
And well, maybe it's just me who sees sleeping with someone after a first date a bit slutty, I suppose I just like to know people a bit better before I sleep with them.
received wisdom regarding how women SHOULD look isn't hanging over them like a giant millstone at ALL. They've NEVER read Cosmo. They're NOT fretting about how revealing their top should be, and how forward they should seem. They WON'T have the words of their peers calling them a slut or a prude ringing in their ears. Oh no...
I suppose I was just looking at it from a male perspective.
How do you come one someone's face without them knowing it's going to happen, surely It's fairly obvious when a guy is going to blow his load? If he's standing over you beating his meat and pointing it at your face, tell him to pack it the fuck in if you don't want it on your face.
He can easily pull out and spadge without saying he's going to
(which is pretty callous behaviour - I find it's always best to give fair warning and let them swallow, spit or abort at their leisure)
you knows this has echoes of the rapist 'she was dressed like a slut, she was asking for it' argument right?
If someone has sex on the first date, they're obviously the sort of person who doesn't care how they're treated during sex....riiight...
Just that a lot of guys do think it's ok, and they're generally the type of guys who would want to sleep with you on a first date.
Am I or the tens of other fellas in this thread who've done exactly the same the kind of guys who'll rape a woman for having the audacity to show a bit of ankle? Think hard before answering.
Also bear in mind that there are women who've had great first-date consensual sex reading your posts and lolling.
I'm not meaning to insinuate that all guys who would sleep with you after just one date think it's ok, but that most guys that would think it's ok to spunk over your face probably do want to sleep with you as soon as they can. Again, I'm making generalisations that aren't always going to be true, but again, I don't think I'm making too big a leap.
I think you've answered yourself there. There are plenty of absolute creeps out there, bullying, nasty creeps who are content to play the long game.
THEIR THEY'RE TH'HAIR
you implied that you think it's acceptable to treat a woman badly/inconsiderately if she is 'acting like a slut' (incidentally, i really don't think having sex on a first date is a particularly 'slutty' thing to do)
Just that they shouldn't be too surprised that some guys end up being pricks when they do so little to make sure they're not before they sleep with them. Everyone knows there are complete cunts out there, and it's your responsibility to work out which ones they are through dating/spending time with them whatever.
should ALWAYS be horrified when they treat her like a sex-toy
Which is why I'm saying they should be more careful who they let into their bed.
because obviously there are twats out there who think that just because someone is acting provocatively then it's okay to do whatever they want to them, and of course they are ones to avoid, BUT saying 'its your responsibility' to weed out the wankers is really misleading.
You can't absolve someone who is a cunt of responsibility for acting like a cunt by saying 'you should have spent more time with them and noticed they were a cunt'. It's always the fault of the person who is a cunt, no matter what lapse in judgement has been made by the other person, and a lapse in judgement doesn't mean that you should just accept you are going to be treated badly.
This may make no sense, i'm tired and need pasta bake.
And I think there are enough cunts out there to make people more wary of them. I'm not absolving the cunts, just saying that people should be a bit more careful of who they are intimate with if they don't want things like this to happen.
but it's in no way their fault if the person they choose to share a bed with is disrespectful to them, even if they ARE acting like a slut (which, again, sex on a first date isn't really). And they should be surprised, because when you're not surprised by someone you're having sex with being a total arse then that's pretty sad/horrible.
and it's homepride tomatoy creamy yummy pasta bake. i put some courgettes in it. om nom.
And I see what you're saying, but still think it's a bad idea sleeping with someone you hardly know, but like I said earlier, I think I presume the worst in people, so am never surprised at the cuntish things people can do.
Yeah it might be a bad idea, but it doesn't mean they deserve bad treatment, y'see? Someone might be acting stupidly, but stupidity does not mean you deserve to accept having your face spunked on if you don't want it.
Fair enough i guess, but if everyone presumed the worst of everyone else what a world we'd live in eh??? and also we'd miss out on some great first date sex, amirite? LAD(Y)
Bad ideas often lead to bad things.
To make a totally piss poor analogy, it's a bad idea to go swimming in a sewage plant, and you're probably going to get ill if you do it.
I don't know why that's the only thing I can think of.
if you know you're going swimming in a sewage plant and you do anyway, you're an idiot.
I think the situation is more like, you want to go swimming in the sea, most beaches are fine for swimming, you go swimming and get ill because there is a sewage works nearby and there weren't warnings on the beach. And there's MY shit analogy (seewhatididthere?)
If guys who were going to spooge on your face without asking went around wearing signs round their necks that said 'i am a tosser and will spooge on your face without asking' then that might warn people off a bit better. sadly they don't.
and buy a slightly more expensive shirt, ignoring the fact that literally everyone in 'The Game' is an egomaniacal fuck-up with serious identity issues (this is second-hand knowledge btw)
Either that or they play shitty indie.
A better analogy would be that you want to eat a pasta bake and pasta bakes are usually totally scrumptious or at the very least adequate but every so often there's one full of used cigarettes and once you've bitten you can never unbite
Most people seem to have adopted the position of 'porn yes, but what TYPE of porn', which is a much more interesting debate IMO than 'porn or no porn' - because the brutal answer to that is 'porn, by any means necessary'
its not good
and seems quite 'specific' in many areas, Im think it is worrying that these particular specifics are repeated in many instances.
It IS likely that such stuff could condition themselves as to what people might want or what the norm is, many people who have not had access to real relationships can also have their brain conditioned more easily.
Of course it cant be banned, but nor should it be celebrated and championed.
My worries concern wider issues as well though, the almost fetischistic use of visual image to the detriment of all our senses and the value placed upon someones attractiveness in purely visual terms.
pron seems to be a consumerist thing (yes i use that word again) even when it is free on tinternet it has ads all over.
Pron seems to be very very narrow, which also makes me think it is suspect at truely representing freedom of expression (as it is often claimed)
still - "I was newly married and told my husband that night how appalled I was, which he fully understood". Sure love! :D
I can see how desensitized men could go on to find shocking, more violent thrills, but surely it works the opposite way too. That old - the less you see, the sexier it is - thing. Give me a pretty girl with a smile on her face, walking down the street, over some naked silicone yoke pumping away like a machine anyday.
bring her to the level of the naked silicone yoke, and then discard her
the cartoon of the woman being put through a meat grinder and him going "god, you're such a fucking PRUDE".
Bunch of hetero males commenting on it here - probably not in the best position to see the pitfalls it can cause in people's sex lives.
I don't mean that in the sense that guys have no right to comment, just more that they haven't had a number of male sexual partners across which they would have experienced evidence of the weird expectations that can arise from the viewing of mainstream pornography, almost none of which (even taking into account the rise of feminist porn, not really mainstream in any case) is about female gratification and what realistically will give a woman an orgasm.
I like to think I'm self aware enough to give due consideration both to what my partner expects (or desires) of my conduct in bed, and to the fact that 99% of pornography is the acting out of a scenario - little different to a television series.
If I don't put down the telephone on people without saying goodbye, then nor will I be inclined to put my hands on my hips while watching myself bang her from behind in a mirror... or high-five an imaginary camera man.
If anything, what you should be afraid of is women taking inspiration from porn. That can get pretty ugly...
hence why we're going so bonkers with the handwringing!
However, I think maybe bleak makes a fair point. I only know the male side of it. But I watch porn with my gf and to my knowledge have never gone around asking women for triple anal, so I assumed that plenty of guys are the same and are able to separate that world from the real world but that could be a bit naive. I still think any spadgers trying to force themselves on women would have been much the same regardless of the availability of porn.
of course she's gonna sleep with him!
but with you groupies it looks like he could have a nice violent five-way.
Just send me the link when you're all done.
the lol shows no signs of abating
I’ll happily pass the time with a nice bit of chainsaw porn, but tinychat really creeps me out
of drake, joe, gb, froglet and I standing naked around a bed that has a chainsaw on it, shrugging at each other
and then retracted it as if menaced by a viper
before doing this, shall we...
in itself is kinda fascinating. and i'm not going to give answers here but again - interested in what people think.
of course men only know the male side of it - but to what extent should we count empathy and intelligent imagination as giving people the ability and 'right' as it were to pronounce a meaningful opinion on this sort of thing. in my (fairly limited) experience of doing things at an academic level I've noticed that people can perhaps be a little more precious about issues to do with gender than with race or sexuality in terms of people from outside the minority/oppressed group giving opinions based on empathy - whether or not those opinions are valid or not.
and i suppose - as somebody who is basically hoping to have an academic career writing about 'queer' issues in literature but being generally quite straight (though not without one or two enjoyable dalliances) - it's something i should be very directly concerned with.
but yeh - how far does empathy hold? when doesn't it hold? even if it can never be complete does this prevent somebody from coming independently to the 'correct' conclusion? etc etc etc
is the best way to hammer out any sort of vague 'truth' on these issues
queer theory is very interesting to me and I'm fascinated by it - the idea that it's not so much an issue of sexuality as a means to torpedo the heteronormative, gender-centric perceptions of society we're taught as kids - queer activism is some of the most joyous, expressive activism imaginable
queer literary criticism is pretty much the most exciting thing EVER
<3 <3 :D :D
:D <3 5-2
the sight of our bodies coming together in passionate sporting congress would have been too much, and it wouldn't have just been 13 year-old lads invading the pitch
Queer literary crit.
- Harry Potter*
- Bill Sikes*
- Webb Traverse*
- Patrick Bateman*
- Humbert Humbert*
Yashmeen and thingy have just got it on in a silent dress shop
I need to fucking read Pynchon
Webb Traverse is one of the main characters.
for god sake don't start with Against the Day though; it's terrifying.
it's still the only one I've read. I've got the new one at the top of 'to read pile'. It's a pity I'm such a lazy fuck when it comes to reading these days.
Did you study literature? My English BA fucking killed reading for me. That and the internet. But mostly my English BA
it begs to be read
maybe now is ripe
(I read the first ten pages a couple of years ago and they were great but I didn't feel any motivation to read on so I shamefully let it slide...)
took me quite some time (and effort), but it was worth it overall. some absoultely amazing bits, as well as many passages I found completely incomprehensible. I found it impossible to read when there was any outside distraction whatsoever, the slightest bit of sound and it ruined my concentration completely.
also: no I didn't study literature. I'm doing history. my only excuse is the internet - it's pathetic, but what can ya do?
Internet it really is. Although when I'm on the move I prefer to watch outside, write poetry or just listen to music. Reading is shunned at every opportunity :(
That said, I'm going to HEREBY pledge to get through G's R this summer. BELIEVE
also every Shakespeare character called Antonio is gay, apparently
nearly every line he speaks. quite an achievement.
men (or at least the sort of men who post on message boards like this) are concerned and aware of issues with what pornography depicts and the sort of gender dynamics going on in it?
'I don't mean that in the sense that guys have no right to comment, just more that they haven't had a number of male sexual partners across which they would have experienced evidence of the weird expectations that can arise from the viewing of mainstream pornography'
I have met men though. I think most heterosexual men are equally as qualified your avergae woman to discuss this.
I really don't see what it is you are getting at. For reasons that would be another (worthwhile) discussion, the overwhelming majority of porn consumers are male, and like any product, it is tailored to suit those consumers. And, seeing as the article and broader discussion is about how modern mainstream pornography is influencing heterosexual sexual relationships, I really struggle to see how men hetero men (ie half of the relationship) aren't well placed to see the pitfalls of over-exposure to pornography (particularly as, as Dines seems to neglect to mention, rises in erectile disfunction and impotence have also been attributed to the proliferation of pornography).
past the point i can be bothered reading all the comments at once, and join in and get shouted at?
*femist argument from non-understanding male*
*Yet I am also i LAD argument*
porn has made girls generally have a whole lot less muff.
I love the internet.