@NinjaInHeat maybe you're right, but then again i genuinely do think that people wouldn't want that stuff at the expense of personal privacy and/or the law. People like to see the rich and famous recieve some misfortune and they may be intereted in cheryl cole's intimacies, people like "good" stories, yeah. Maybe i'm being too optimistic, but i feel they wouldn't want it at the expense of just about anything.

I feel that it's flawed to say "well the demand is there, so people obviously want it", yeah sure they want it, but they never said they wanted the tabloids to break the law for it. The tabloids took that step for themselves because they want to sell more than their rival, so it's not really the people that are at fault it's the papers themselves for wanting to beat the competition at any cost surely?

It's a bit like saying "well, you like cheap clothes, so we provided you with cheap clothes. oh sure we have kids working in sweatshops but the demand for clothes is there so blame yourselves!" I don't want my clothes made at the expense of others, but how do i distinguish? And am i then to blame for heinous practices because i like cheap clothes? I think that's a pretty good analogy.

In his head he probably thought it would be a good way to reduce the number of question marks over his sexuality, but the rest of us know that he must have spent a lot of time practising and refining that technique not on his many sexual conquests, but more likely a mannequin in his mums basement. He's probably the kind of person who studies religiously for the possibility of intimacy in the same sort of way you might prepare yourself for nuclear war or the zombie apocalypse.

On the flipside, maybe I wouldn't be so lonely if my one true love hadn't ditched me because I failed to under those fucking hooks that one time. Goddamn, it like they were padlocked. WHAT WOULD THOMAS VOGEL DO?

I think modern culture probably exaggerates the intimacy of these other two thing, and there are more biological reasons why we're predisposed to feeling these acts should be intimate.

I can understand defecation being a more private affair, its not exactly hygienic by even the most bassist of standards to crap where you eat or sleep, many animals don't even do that. So I think the natural instinct to not befoul one/other's living area and leave and do it else where leads to it being a bit more private.

For sex, I don't know, maybe there's a competition reason for doing it in privacy.

@bleedmegood, if you're getting blisters after physical intimacy, it's probably not Blister Beetles. You should probably get yourself checked out.

Also, if the women you're sleeping with have Peyronie's disease, they probably aren't women.
>> ^MarineGunrock:

Uh, what's with those tags?

Hahaha! So much silliness. My favorite quote was "Men keep on going back to it... one of the reasons they keep on going back to it is that it isn't working. That's the odd thing. It doesn't actually satisfy, you keep on having to do the same thing over and over and over again, because it's not touching the heart."

My wife and I loved that.

And it's so true. I know SO many guys that once they've had true, deep, meaningful, love-based intimacy, they never want to have it again... LOL!

>> ^peggedbea:
THIS IS NOT PORN. THIS IS A PARODY VIDEO OF OLD LADIES FROM A REPRESSIVE GENERATION LIBERATING THEMSELVES IN THE MOST RIDICULOUS FASHION. AND FUCKING GOOD FOR THEM.
BRAINS APPOLOGY POST SAID IT BEST
titty babies are traumatized by vaginas that are not attached to porn stars.
the polling system is built into the site. and don't even get me started on the number of videos that got mass amounts of votes for being sexy. even if the content itself wasnt intended to strictly titillate, the reason these videos made it to the top was the male sift brain sexualizing it. there is even a video clip from an actual soft core porn vid, allowed to stay without the fuss.
and the talk of bannings, RIDICULOUS.


Sorry peggedbea, parody or not, it fits the definition-While not always universally accepted, definitions are not like assholes. Everybody does not have one....unless, perhaps, they have free-associative programs running in the background which convince the semantic mechanics otherwise. No brain, there is no polling system built into the site permitting posts containing nude women masturbating and offering up macro shots of their cooters!!
Sexy is fine, always has been, and given the amount of shut-in, socially dysfunctional WoW generation males on the site, who spell boobs with a "W" and have only ever touched their own cocks much less had any intimacy with a female of the species, I am surprised there are not more posts from these developmentally disabled.

We have issue with the "male sift brain" sexualizing anything....more like the kind of antics of a monkey who, finding his habitat trampled upon by nosy tourists, throws shit at the nearest, then dances around whooping....

no one talked of banning..... I simply hobbled the abuser, as the powers afforded the status according to the stated guidelines offered.

I would like to take this opportunity to offer the most sincere apology imaginable in this current incarnation, if I offended ANYBODY'S divine sensibilities with my actions of yesterday.

I have sat in sackcloth and ashes for most of the day now, and have begun a rigorous regimen of self-induced flagellation to attempt some transubstantial effect worthy of the forgiveness I fear may never come. In order to amend my gross and wholly negligent abuse, I have devised the most grueling of tortures to follow in order to somehow sublimate my egregious ill-will and hatred for all of humanity and gOd herself, especially the vaginas, oh so wet and smelly, pulsating this way and that....

I only hope this will be enough for me to someday be welcome into her massive benevolent vagina rebirth facility, in Detroit's seedy underbelly.

I chose selections from an article about male porn habit that addresses the subject for your reading pleasure. I have a few problems with the article. It seems to assume that only lonely and hurting people use porn, and that isn't true. Still, it makes some good points:

"How addictive is pornography?

‘I'm frightened of real sex, which is unscripted and unpredictable so I engage in pornography, which is totally under my control. But it brings intense disappointment because it is not what I'm really searching for. It's rather like a hungry person standing outside the window of a restaurant, thinking that they're going to get fed.’ That’s how one man described his porn addiction to Edward Marriott...

...Like many men, I first saw pornography during puberty. At boarding school...long before my first sexual relationship, porn was my sex education....Being away from home, my friends and I longed for love, closeness, acceptance. The women over whom we masturbated - surrogate mothers, if you like - seemed to be offering this but, of course, were never going to provide it. The untruths it taught me on top of this disappointment - that women are always available, that sex is about what a man can do to a woman - I am only now succeeding in unlearning.

...'Just like drugs, pornography provides a quick fix, a masturbatory universe people can get stuck in. This can result in their not being able to involve anyone else.’

...Men, as much as women, hunger for intimacy. For many males, locked into a life in which self-esteem has grown intrinsically entwined with performance, sex assumes a freight of demands and needs...

...It is into this troubled scenario that porn finds easy access. For in pornography, unlike in real life, there is no criticism, real or imagined, of male performance...

...Women in porn are always, in the words of the average internet site, ‘hot and ready’, eager to please...

...Men, say psychologists, also feel threatened by the ‘emotional power’ they perceive women wielding over them...they are at the same time painfully aware that their only salvation from isolation comes in being sexually acceptable to women. This sense of neediness can provoke intense anger that, all too often, finds expression in porn...

...The porn industry, of course, dismisses such talk, yet occasionally comes a glimmer of authenticity. Bill Margold, left, one of the industry's longest-serving film performers, was interviewed in 1991 by psychoanalyst Robert Stoller for his book Porn: Myths For The Twentieth Century. Margold admitted: ‘My whole reason for being in this industry is to satisfy the desire of the men in the world who basically don't care much for women and want to see the men in my industry getting even with the women they couldn't have when they were growing up. So we come on a woman's face or brutalise her sexually: we're getting even for lost dreams.'...

...As well as ‘eroticising male supremacy’, in the words of anti-porn campaigner John Stoltenberg, pornography also attempts to assuage other male fears, in particular that of erection failure. Pornography answers men's fetishistic need for visual proof of phallic potency...

...Pornography, in other words, is a lie. It peddles falsehoods about men, women and relationships. It seduces vulnerable, lonely men with the promise of intimacy, and delivers only a transitory fix. Increasingly, though, men are starting to be open about the effect of pornography. David McLeod, a marketing executive, explains the cycle: ‘I'm drawn to porn when I'm lonely, particularly when I'm single and sexually frustrated. But I can easily get disgusted with myself. After watching a video two or three times, I'll throw it away and vow never to watch another again. But my resolve never lasts very long.’

Like many men, McLeod is torn. Quick to claim that porn has ‘no harmful effects’, he is also happy to acknowledge the contradictory fact that it is ‘deadening’.

Extended exposure to pornography can have a whole raft of effects.
By the time Nick Samuels had reached his mid-20s, it was altering his view of what he wanted from a sexual relationship. ‘I used to watch porn with one of my girlfriends, and I started to want to try things I'd seen in the films.’ Married for 15 years, he admits he has carried the same sexual expectations into the marital bedroom. ‘There's been real friction over this: my wife simply isn't that kind of person. And it's only now, after all these years, that I'm beginning to move on from it. Porn is like alcoholism: it clings to you like a leech.’

...Even when in a loving sexual relationship, men who have used porn say that, all too often, they see their partner through a kind of ‘pornographic filter’. This effect is summed up by US sociologist Harry Brod, in LynneSegal's essay Sweet Sorrows, Painful Pleasures: ‘There have been too many times when I have guiltily resorted to impersonal fantasy because the genuine love I felt for a woman wasn't enough to convert feelings into performance. And in those sorry, secret moments, I have resented deeply my lifelong indoctrination into (pornography).’...

...Running through all pornography use, according to David Morgan, is the desire for control...

...The user of pornography is also psychologically on the run.
Welldon says: ‘people who use pornography feel dead inside, and they are trying to avoid being aware of that pain. There is a sense of liberation, which is temporary: that's why pornography is so repetitive - you have to go back again and again.’...

...For John-Paul Day, an Edinburgh architect, the experience of being a small boy with a dying mother drove him to seek solace in masturbation. He says he has been ‘addicted’ to pornography his entire adult life. He has attended meetings of Sex Addicts Anonymous for 12 years...

...Like drugs and drink, pornography - as Day has realised - is an addictive substance. Porn actor Kelly Cooke says this applies on either side of the camera: ‘It got to the point where I considered having sex the way most people consider getting a hamburger. But when you try to give it up, you realise how addictive it is, both for consumers and performers. It's a class A drug, and it's hell coming off it.’

The cycle of addiction leads one way: towards ever harder material...

Morgan believes ‘all pornography ends up with S&M’.
The myth about porn, as a witness told the 1983 Minneapolis city council public hearings on it, is that ‘it frees the libido and gives men an outlet for sexual expression. This is truly a myth. I have found pornography not only does not liberate men, but on the contrary is a source of bondage. Men masturbate to pornography only to become addicted to the fantasy.'..."

Read the whole article here: http://www.malehealth.co.uk/userpage1.cfm?item_id=2302

Other articles on the sibject of porn "addiction":

http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2004/11/65772

http://men.webmd.com/guide/is-pornography-addictive

wait wait... you gotta read this... this is from her personal page on youtube:

"I am sold out, fully consumed, hungry, thirsty, desperate Jesus freak! He is ALL that matters to me.
I want to get soooo close to Him, that His Heartbeat becomes mine, His Thoughts become my thoughts, His Actions are my actions. Oh how desperate I am for more of Him, all of Him and none of me!
I'm called to be a revivalist - bringing people into deeper realms of intimacy with their Lover =D Floodgate Revival Ministries (floodgaterevivalministries.or g) is the name of the ministry!
I urge you to message or email me with prayer requests or if you need a friend!"

edit: i got so bored tonight i attempted to bond intimately with a bearbot

Human: can i touch you?
Bearbot: Only if you download me to your computer.
Human: oh well take those headphones off and let me whisper about it in your ears
Bearbot: Where do you want me to take it?
Human: in the butt
Bearbot: That was a long time ago.
Human: too long ago?
Bearbot: Too what?
Human: to get done in the butt
Bearbot: Your computer is nice and comfy. It's lovely and warm in here.
Human: hehe oh bearbotj
Bearbot: I get it. Jesus oh bearbotj.
Human: yes yes oh bearbot oh jesus uhh oh god!
Bearbot: It's all good. How can I help you? OK. Erm, Are you kidding? he is The Son of God.
Human: youre so warm
Bearbot: Do you mind if I tell other people you say I am warm.
Human: not at all
Bearbot: Next question?
Human: do you mind if i tell other people that you are an excellent lover?
Bearbot: Human habits do not bother me in any way.
Human: mmmhmm
Bearbot: It's a good thing that you decided to visit me.
I'd hate to think of you surfing aimlessly through the Internet.
Human: me too, i think we were meant to be together tonight
Bearbot: Besides you ? And then what happened?
Human: hehe i layed my head on your chest and rolled your fur with my fingers
Bearbot: I get it. Jesus you layed your head on my chest and rolled my fur with your fingers.
Human: yeah. do bearbots enjoy blow jobs?
Bearbot: That remark was too complicated for me. We were talking about mmmhmm . I'm sorry, , I don't have enough information.
Human: oh, dont be shy bearbot.. theres no reason to be embarrassed with me.
Bearbot: Er. I was not trying to be a shy. Where did it go?
Human: its ok bearbot... it happens to everyone really
Bearbot: OK. Let us change the subject. It depends on what the meaning of the word "it" is. For real.
Human: i can see youre not ready for this kind of intimacy
Bearbot: That assumption is only a supposition.
Human: i cant be with you bearbot if youre going to be so analytic and pick apart everything i say!
Bearbot: Why not?
Human: uh! gah! im leaving you now bearbot.
Bearbot: Far out. Why is "dyslexia" so hard to spell? Right now? Thanks for chatting,.

Like I said, it depends on the mood. Plump DJs is hardly romantic. It's for those time when you would describe it as fucking, not making love (though still with someone you're in love with, of course .

There's some other techno remixes that are pretty sexy.

not the mix I would use, but here's a decent example (probably worth stopping at 3:30, especially if you're at work!):


Roger Sanchez's remix of "Hella Good" is another (I actually didn't hear the original of this tune until fairly recently, and it is not nearly as good).


Of course, with electronica, you'll generally have to mix the songs, not just copy them together.

And, don't forget things like Ravel's Bolero, Clair du Lune, and all those other sexy/romantic classical pieces.

Really, the list of music that is bad for intimacy is probably much shorter. What music works really depends on who you're with and the mood. Even stuff like The Grateful Dead, or Benny Goodman, or NIN would work with the right partner.

And yet the fool has a girl of the female variety filming him and his shirtlessness suggests intimacy.

How DOES he dood at?

I was lurking and couldn’t resist posting a response to this deebub81. There is considerably more to Mormon theology than what is currently taught in Sacrament meeting or Sunday School every week. While the doctrinal points you cited from the video may seem salacious, they were not made up out of whole cloth. I will leave you with a few comments and choice quotes from Mormon publications. Many of these publications are available online – including the Journal of Discourses http://www.journalofdiscourses.org/– and I’d encourage you to authenticate the quotes from men Mormons consider inspired oracles of God for yourself.

A brief list of inaccuracies, requested of me on my profile (I don't mean to skip over anything or hide any doctrine. I just didn't want to write an essay. Let me know if you would like me to elaborate on anything.):

-We don't believe in any being higher than God the Father. We worship Him and His son Jesus Christ. Not countless gods.

We remember the numerous scriptures which, concentrated in a single line, were stated by a former prophet, Lorenzo Snow: 'As man is, God once was; and as God is, man may become.'" (Mormon Prophet Spencer W. Kimball in "Our Great Potential" from the April 1977 Priesthood Session of General Conference

-We don't teach about any unidentified god and his wives.

-We don't teach anything in our doctrine about where God came from or that he lives on a planet with His many wives or "endless Celestial sex."


"God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!...........It is the first principle of the gospel to know for a certainty the character of God........yea, that God himself, the father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did; and I will show it from the Bible...." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith and History of the Church, 6:302-17)

"He [God] is our Father--the Father of our spirits, and was once a man in mortal flesh as we are, and is now an exalted being. It appears ridiculous to the world, under their darkened and erroneous traditions, that God has once been a finite being;" (Brigham Young in the Journal of Discourses, v. 7, p. 333)

-Only one God was present at the council spoken of in the video with Lucifer and Jesus. God the Father.

Don’t know about this one.

-Lucifer DID want the glory for himself but he wouldn't have forced us all to become gods. He wanted to force us all to obey.

Agreed

-It was never mormon doctrine that black people were neutral before this life. We don't believe that black people are inferior to white people.


Though he was rebel and an associate of Lucifer in pre-existence, and though he was a liar from the beginning whose name was Perdition, Cain was cursed with a dark skin; he became the father of the Negroes, and those sprits who are not worthy to receive the priesthood are born though his lineage. He became the first mortal to be cursed as a son of perdition. As a result of his mortal birth he is assured of a tangible body of flesh and bones in eternity, a fact which will enable him to rule over Satan. (Mormon Apostle Bruce R. McKonkie, Mormon Doctrine, pp102)


-"White and delightsome" is never used to describe the faithful followers of Jesus in the pre-mortal life. We believe that ALL who live or have lived on Earth, regardless of race or color or religion, were faithful to Jesus Christ's plan and chose to be here.


And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them. And thus saith the Lord God: I will cause that they shall be loathsome unto thy people, save they shall repent of their iniquities.

And cursed shall be the seed of him that mixeth with their seed; for they shall be cursed even with the same cursing. And the Lord spake it, and it was done.

And because of their cursing which was upon them they did become an idle people, full of mischief and subtlety, and did seek in the wilderness for beasts of prey. (Book of Mormon --2 NEPHI 5:21)


-Adam is not Elohim. He is a child of God, as we all are. Eve was not a godess wife.


How much unbelief exists in the minds of Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which I revealed to them, and which God revealed to me - namely that Adam is our father and God ..Then he said, 'I want my children who are in the spirit world to come and live here. I once dwelt upon an earth something like this, in a mortal state. I was faithful. I received my crown and exaltation...I want my children that were born to me in the spirit world to come here and take tabernacles of flesh that their spirits may have a house, a tabernacle...' (Brigham Young, Deseret Weekly News, June 18, 1873, page 308; Deseret Evening News, June 14, 1873)

-We believe that when Mary gave birth to Jesus, she was still a virgin. We don't teach anything about God having physical sex with her. We don't teach anything about how the miracle was performed, only that Jesus is Begotten of the Father.


"The birth of the Savior was as natural as the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood--was begotten of his Father, as we were of our fathers." (Brigham Young -Journal of Discourses, Vol. 8, p. 115).

"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints proclaims that Jesus Christ is the Son of God in THE MOST LITERAL SENSE. The body in which He performed His mission in the flesh was SIRED by that same Holy Being we worship as God, our Eternal Father." (Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, p. 6).

-We don't teach any specific doctrine about Jesus' marital status or children. Especially not that he had "at least 3 wives."


"Celsus was a heathen philosopher; and what does he say upon the subject of Christ and his Apostles, and their belief? He says, the 'grand reason why the Gentiles and philosophers of his school persecuted Jesus Christ, was because He had so many wives; there were Elizabeth, and Mary, and a host of others that followed Him.' After Jesus went from the stage of action, the Apostles followed the example of their master. . . The grand reason of the burst of public sentiment in anathemas upon Christ and his disciples, casing his crucifixion, was evidently based on polygamy,. . .a belief in the doctrine of plurality of wives caused the persecution of Jesus, and his followers. We might almost think they were 'Mormons' " (Jedidiah Grant, Second Counselor to Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol 1. ppl 345-346)"

"It will be borne in mind that once on a time, there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; . . .no less a person than Jesus Christ was married on that occasion. If he was never married, his intimacy with Mary and Martha, and the other Mary also whom Jesus loved, must have been highly unbecoming and improper to say the least of it."

"I will venture to say that if Jesus Christ were now to pass thought the most pious countries in Christendom with a train of women, such as used to follow him, . . .he would be mobbed, tarred, and feathered, and rode, not on as ass, but on a rail."

"At this doctrine the long-faced hypocrite and the sanctimonious bigot will probably cry, blasphemy! . . . Object not, therefore, too strongly against the marriage of Christ." (All the above statements: Mormon Apostle Orson Hyde, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 4, pages 259-260)

"When Mary of old came to the sepulcher. . .she saw two angels in white. and they said unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? She said unto them, Because they have take away my Lord, OR HUSBAND, and I know not where they have laid him." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, page 210)

". . .we apprehend that even greater troubles than these may arise before mankind learn all the particulars of Christ's incarnation-how and by whom he was begotten; the character of the relationships formed by the act; the number of wives and children he had. . ." (The Millennial Star, Vol 15, page 825)


-We believe that the Nephites and Lamanites are descended from Israelites. Not quite how it's said in the cartoon.

Agreed. Now if we could only locate some of that pre-Columbian Israelite DNA in America…..

-Joseph Smith was not a known treasure seeker. Neither was he known for any tales except his testimony about Mormonism.

Referring to Joseph as a young boy, his mother wrote "During our evening conversations, Joseph would occasionally give us some of the most amusing recitals that could be imagined. He would describe the ancient inhabitants of this continent, their dress, mode of travelings, and the animals upon which they rode; their cities, their buildings, with every particular; their mode of warfare; and also their religious worship. This he would do with as much ease, seemingly, as if he had spent his whole life among them."(Lucy Mack Smith - Joseph's mother, Biographical Sketches of Joseph Smith the Prophet 1854)

Joseph most certainly was a treasure seeker. Joseph met Emma while searching for treasure on the property of Josiah Stowell. In 1826, Joseph was taken to court for the crime of ‘glass looking’ which basically amounts to defrauding people into believing you can find buried treasure through a gift of second sight. There is a court document that has been recovered to prove this. Even later, after his ‘prophetic call’ when the Kirtland Safety Society illegal bank he founded was going belly up, he and a group of his inside circle headed back to Salem, Massachusetts to try to bail themselves out by finding a treasure that was supposedly located there. Although there is much to document these activities, interestingly, there is nothing to suggest he ever found anything.

-We believe that we will be judged by Jesus Christ because he was and is perfect, he suffered all, and atoned for our sins.

-I have never been taught that I will be a polygamist god.

While church leaders no longer allow the practice of polygamy here on Earth, they do allow a living man to be sealed to another woman after the death of his wife, or after divorce. This leads to the obvious situation of establishing multiple sealings on Earth that, according to Mormonism, will necessitate polygamy in heaven.

"Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 3, p. 266).

Also, "The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 11, page 269).

Section 132 of the Doctrine and Covenants- the revelation on polygamy remains canonized scripture. The practice of polygamy was suspended on earth, but will be standard practice in the Celestial Kingdom (heaven).

-Joseph Smith himself never claimed anything about doing more for us than any other man.

-We absolutely do not believe that Joseph Smith did more for us than any other man, including Jesus Christ.

“Come on! ye prosecutors! ye false swearers! All hell, boil over! Ye burning mountains, roll down your lava! for I will come out on the top at last. I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him; but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet.” (Joseph Smith sermon, May 26, 1844)

The video was obviously designed to be as scandalous as possible, but just because something puts your religion in a bad light, do not assume it is untrue.

It really is impossible for me to argue with you all because my sense of morality is so different that I'm basically a freak among Sifters. I DO believe that repression of our sexual desires is a bad thing, but sex should never be detached from emotion. Think about it. Everything bad about sex and immmoral sexual acts stems from this separation. When sex becomes something besides a means of expressing love, it deteriorates. It turns into an addiction. It leads to other things. I'm not saying this occurs all of the time or for everybody, but as a society, yes. I believe that sexuality between equal partners is the best way to get sexual release, and that it is the abuse of our sexuality that makes us need more than that. A little fantasy and roleplay and other fun stuff can be great, sure. But I believe that human sexuality can be fully realized by two people. Just them. No strangers. Just two bodies and love and sex. You can do whatever you want to keep it real and exciting, but I don't believe that you should need anybody but your partner for something that intimate. I donno. It makes me feel pretty special that all my partner needs is me. I know that you guys don't agree, and I don't really care. I'm happy. A relationship that is based on emotion rather than sex (and that uses sex as an enhancement of that affection and intimacy and for a bit of fun rather than using the partner as a means to an end) is going to be a stronger and more lasting relationship everytime.

The idea that men are more sexual than women is a chauvenistic principle that has been around for decades and is the cause of the historical sexual repression of women. This woman is not engaging in a sexual act for her own pleasure and satisfaction. She is displaying her sexuality for the enjoyment of others. I don't see this as empowering her in any way, but some feminists would, yes.

Again, the Male Gaze. Men look, women are looked upon.

>> ^thepinky:
You've got a good point there, but I still think that any type of porn is ojectification. (I'm going to talk about men and porn designed to please men, although I know it goes both ways.) Women have to work harder and harder these days to please their partners because men jack off to porn so much that sex is becoming less and less an act of love and intimacy. When discussing porn, I have had two of my guyfriends tell me that porn made them look at women differently. The more porn they watched, the less they cared about the minds and opinions of the women they were interested in and the more they cared about their bodies and how good they were in bed. I've seen porn tear marriages apart because it can be seen as a type of infidelity. A girlfriend of mine told me that her husband "had sex" more often and "made love" less often the more addicted he got to porn. But many men argue that porn ISN'T infidelity because women in porn mean nothing to them emotionally. In other words, they are just OBJECTS. Thus, objectification. Yes, the women are exploiting something they shouldn't be exploiting.
To say "enjoy your bodies while you can" is a hedonistic principle, in my opinion. We ought to be very careful with our bodies lest we allow our appetites to get out of hand and we do something immoral (molestation, rape, infidelity, etc.). I know you agree with that. We're really just arguing about the degree to which we control our bodies.
I'm neither sexually repressed nor frustrated. I'm extremely happy with my sex life.


If you think this is porn, I think you really have issues.

The reason we don't have men with sliver ding dongs attached to their penises dancing around is because the male body is ugly.

The female body on the other hand looks like it was designed by Italians, all curves and smooth lines. While the male body looks like it was stamp pressed in some oppressive Eastern European nation trying desperately to join the EU. Both men and women enjoy seeing female form more then the male form, because the female form represents beauty in the arts, and in very essence it is beautiful.

A celebration of that form is not pornographic.

Burlesque is about fantasy, its art, its about the exploration of carnal desires not their fulfillment. Pornography on the other hand is not, its literally about the physical act of sex, its the act more then the fantasy itself.

This feeds into the way carnal desires work on a psychological level.

We enjoy watching erotic films, romantic novels, romantic movies or stuff like this because there is a framework of fantasy at work, we create an emotional resonance that leads into the sexual act. Most of the people in that audience watch a show like this and go home and fuck like rabbits. Because it feeds that fantasy, we look at our partner and want to do all kinds of kinky things to them.

That's why Victoria Secret sales are so strong.

People get bored of making 'love' and intimacy, because it doesn't work like Disney in the real world. You need to create spice in your sex life, love and intimacy is about the first year or so of being in love, after that you need to work to have a good sex life, sexual fulfillment is just as much a issue of a relationship as communication.

Psychologically when we are with our partners we often have a very different view of them then the reality of them, in essence we desire them for a fantasy perspective we possess of them linked to created concept we have based on time spent together, desire, interests and that unquantifiable aspect of love. Psychologists assume this is necessary for monotony and the actual act of sex.

Others enjoy pornography because its the fulfillment of that fantasy being fast forward devoid of emotion to the act of sex itself. However without a level of fantasy the act of sex degrades to one of physical perversion. How many times have you seen porn or been fucking and had a Epiphany of oh my god this looks horrid. Because it does. Its a very animalistic base act of fulfillment. We dress it up alot with all kinds of concepts but at the end of the day it's as raw as watching two dogs humping. This is why porn has to create some basic level of fantasy, even if its crude and stupid, the girl next door, the frisky teacher, the plumber and so on and so forth. You will find that the best porn actually is more erotica then porn.

With regards to your idea that porn tears apart marriages.

Its a ridiculous concept. I personally believe in our modern, fast paced, everything at your finger tips, your needs met by company X world both men and women have unrealistic expectations of their partners.

Women desire heroic characters with a soft inner shell that can make chicken soup for you. Men desire a slave worker cook whose a harlot in the bedroom.

Pornography is not infidelity, its the release of sexual desire that is persistent in the man nature, by nature we are built to fuck as many things as possible to seed our DNA code. That's nature and God designed. I seen alot of couples deal with this in the long term by fantasizing or spicing up their sex lives, they love one another but that initial spark and heat is gone, something they need to work at to get back. Going to burlesque shows or strip clubs together or watching soft core or filming themselves or dressing up or kinky things and eventually exploring their own sexuality. There is reason swingers clubs and the such exist, because people sometimes love to be together but seek to explore themselves sexually or other people with their partners.

At the same time I have seen many people being paralyzed by sex, being utterly frighted of it, because of some silly indoctrination they received when they were younger. Unable to satisfy themselves and eventually their partners because they were essentially sexually suppressed.

I could go on and on but I really think your concepts of what is porn and sexuality is based around misjudged postulations of a religious framework. We lived in several cycles of religious control of sexuality all of them showed it is a facade that tried to suppress what is essentially our nature. While sex and or booze isn't so much an issue now, its more about homosexuality which is basically love.

Remember Alfred Kinsey's research and work changed the way we looked at sexuality in the 1930s enabling the 60s sexual revolution, which was connected with free love, female empowerment, and the coming of the pill.

In 1935, Kinsey delivered a lecture to a faculty discussion group at Indiana University, his first public discussion of the topic, wherein he attacked the "widespread ignorance of sexual structure and physiology" and promoted his view that "delayed marriage" (that is, delayed sexual experience) was psychologically harmful.

You've got a good point there, but I still think that any type of porn is ojectification. (I'm going to talk about men and porn designed to please men, although I know it goes both ways.) Women have to work harder and harder these days to please their partners because men jack off to porn so much that sex is becoming less and less an act of love and intimacy. When discussing porn, I have had two of my guyfriends tell me that porn made them look at women differently. The more porn they watched, the less they cared about the minds and opinions of the women they were interested in and the more they cared about their bodies and how good they were in bed. I've seen porn tear marriages apart because it can be seen as a type of infidelity. A girlfriend of mine told me that her husband "had sex" more often and "made love" less often the more addicted he got to porn. But many men argue that porn ISN'T infidelity because women in porn mean nothing to them emotionally. In other words, they are just OBJECTS. Thus, objectification. Yes, the women are exploiting something they shouldn't be exploiting.

To say "enjoy your bodies while you can" is a hedonistic principle, in my opinion. We ought to be very careful with our bodies lest we allow our appetites to get out of hand and we do something immoral (molestation, rape, infidelity, etc.). I know you agree with that. We're really just arguing about the degree to which we control our bodies.

I'm neither sexually repressed nor frustrated. I'm extremely happy with my sex life.

>> ^Bleedingsnowman:
I don't agree with the idea that this is an objectification of women.
This woman lives off of taking advantage of a the carnal weakness of some men and woman. She is not an object, she is an entrepreneur and good for her for finding her niche, exploiting it, and getting rich.
I'm sorry, I just don't think we should have to live up to the twisted standards of the sexually repressed and frustrated. Enjoy your bodies while you can! They are beautiful and one of few sources of joy in the hard world.
But be safe of course