On Sexuality

[LACE]

Plenty of people in this thread have demonstrated that the media works in every way possible. It might not be so apparent to you as a woman, but they exploit us every bit as much as they exploit you. The "lynx effect", the guy who's supposed to get all the girls, the man in the aftershave advert being persued by Kate Moss in a lacey dress, etc.

I agree with your point there, and of course it's apparent to me. Men are exploited right along with women these days, but the difference is men still hold the majority of power, and this causes women to be presented throughout all media (film, TV, magazines)through a male's perspective. The media bias against women is so much more aggressive, and is directed at us from such a young age. Quick case in point, you might have seen this study that came out recently about women in film, here are some statistics.

* Men had 67% of the speaking roles, while women had only 33%.
* Female characters are more likely to wear revealing clothing than men (26% vs. 5%)
* Women are more likely than men to appear partially nude (24% vs. 8%)

Even if you don't believe in these types of studies, it's obvious that there's a definite imbalance.

[cosmic_surgeon]

Plenty of people in this thread have demonstrated that the media works in every way possible. It might not be so apparent to you as a woman, but they exploit us every bit as much as they exploit you. The "lynx effect", the guy who's supposed to get all the girls, the man in the aftershave advert being persued by Kate Moss in a lacey dress, etc.

I agree with your point there, and of course it's apparent to me. Men are exploited right along with women these days, but the difference is men still hold the majority of power, and this causes women to be presented throughout all media (film, TV, magazines)through a male's perspective. The media bias against women is so much more aggressive, and is directed at us from such a young age. Quick case in point, you might have seen this study that came out recently about women in film, here are some statistics.

* Men had 67% of the speaking roles, while women had only 33%.
* Female characters are more likely to wear revealing clothing than men (26% vs. 5%)
* Women are more likely than men to appear partially nude (24% vs. 8%)

Even if you don't believe in these types of studies, it's obvious that there's a definite imbalance.

That's interesting. I certainly take your point here! An imbalance in the allocation of speaking roles is certainly something to ponder...

[LACE]

What about degrading women sexually who are consenting of it or even enjoy it?

If that is fine, shouldn't porn that degrades women be fine too?

I mean that's the thing, feminism isn't black and white, and even within the feminist movement, there are differing opinions. Some more extreme then others. I mean, one of the reasons why Sasha Grey starting doing porn was because she felt it would be a safer way to explore her interest in BDSM. In reality, there is a need for a variety of healthy perspectives on sexuality and women's bodies.

[__________]

* Women are more likely than men to appear partially nude (24% vs. 8%)

To be fair though, the female figure is more interesting than the male figure to the majority of the population.
Most ladies are quite happy to examine another female's figure and comment on it, but not many men are up for looking at another guy's ass.

I don't really have an opinion, was just making an observation.

[Genevieve]

What about degrading women sexually who are consenting of it or even enjoy it?

If that is fine, shouldn't porn that degrades women be fine too?

I mean that's the thing, feminism isn't black and white, and even within the feminist movement, there are differing opinions. Some more extreme then others. I mean, one of the reasons why Sasha Grey starting doing porn was because she felt it would be a safer way to explore her interest in BDSM. In reality, there is a need and a space for a variety of healthy perspectives on sexuality and women's bodies.

I was asking for a perspective and not necessarily the 'feminist' one. I don't really like feminism, pro-LGBT-activism or anti-racist movements and so on. A lot of people who take part of them are everything they claim to be against by suggesting that if you're a REAL empowered [instert minority here] you should act a certain way.

Other than that, it's almost always racial minorities fighting for 'equality' in racial issues. It's almost always women fighting for women's rights. Almost always gay people fighting for LGBT rights. To me it just reeks of 'I feel disadvantaged in society, it's because I happen to be [insert minority here] and therefore, I fight for rights for [this minority].' A lot of supposedly 'politically conscious rappers' who are fighting the good fight for black America, for example, are some of the most homophobic people in the music business. They don't care about equality for black people. They care about how they themselves are treated as individuals and try to hide behind some nobel cause like 'racial equality'.

What I find far more respectful to every group of people is by stop looking at them as a group and get all 'group thinking' out of politics and just grant every individual to the same freedoms and rights as the other. I think movements like the feminist one are counterproductive to that because it creates another cultural segregation. That and so-called 'voices for female empowerment' project their own personal over the whole female population by calling it the 'feminist perspective' and creating another stereotype.

[LACE]

Well the feminist part was just simple discussion, an 'opener' if you will. lol I was hoping the latter part of my argument would've had more of an affect as I was placing what you said previously in positive context.

[slothrop]

Other than that, it's almost always racial minorities fighting for 'equality' in racial issues. It's almost always women fighting for women's rights. Almost always gay people fighting for LGBT rights. To me it just reeks of 'I feel disadvantaged in society, it's because I happen to be [insert minority here] and therefore, I fight for rights for [this minority].'

So if you're disadvantaged in society because you're part of a minority then you should just sit there and hope that someone else can be bothered to do something about it? Or what?

To put it another way - do you believe that there are no issues that disproportionately affect people because they're black, female, gay or transgender? Or that when an issue disproportionately affects one group we shouldn't take that into account when talking about it?

[bright maroon]

You are crazy if you think sexism/or sexualism isn't at play almost everywhere constantly.

The only thing worse than getting swept aside by a presumptuous - uninterested male
is being stepped up on by a snake of a superfiscially beautiful woman.


The only saving grace here is when a truelly physically beautiful person refuses to exploit the twisted benefit..
in favor of - equality.

[bright maroon]

Especially now...in these particular days - the late 90's and up
are the age of grossly commercialized and fetishized simulacra

[Pistonsbeneath]

this is all so unimportant, if were all hit with a reset surely peoples need to survive and have the basics would relegate this to unimportance

[LACE]

Until the reset buttons hit then I'd like to think it is important. This is the world we live in, it's relevant.

[seckle]

this is private website. no one has free speech here. let that sink in completely.

how many discussions are too much?
the definition of moderation answers that question. we're not going to let the same circular-logic discussions repeat on a loop forever. thats not to say that discussions on a topic can't be started, but 15 separate multiple page discussions all about the same thing, and the same train of thought are just stupid, no matter what the subject. they clog up the forum and encourage trolling. as you can see we have more moderators now, because of the traffic and particularly here because many of you try the armchair anarchy thing 24hrs a day now.

remember that this place is for community, and by default in a internet community there must be compromise and tolerance, or else its just one big fucking nursery school, and we become babysitters, and trust me, none of the moderators look forward to that.

[bright maroon]

Besides -

I thought the problem with those threads had to do with search linking or something...

trying to avoid DSF from popping up for access to freaks by accidental connection via metatagging or something


Nothing really to do with liking or disliking eye candy posts...

[bright maroon]

Besides -

I thought the problem with those threads had to do with search linking or something...

trying to avoid DSF from popping up for access to freaks by accidental connection via metatagging or something


Nothing really to do with liking or disliking eye candy posts...per say

[kay]

I'd like to throw out something that might be from a slightly different viewpoint. It bears on the subject of "Ooo boobies!" and "Look at the tits on that!". Frankly speaking, I generally don't talk about women in that way. In fact, I'm downright uncomfortable doing so, and being in the presence of people who do that non-stop. My interest is more on personality and the whole package, rather than specific body parts.

However, this generally leads me to being labelled as "uninterested". One of my oldest friends once described me as asexual. For the record, I'm neither.

This then brings up two things:
1) The impression I get from the male demographic is that I'm slightly odd. Not gay, just odd.
2) The impression I get from the female demographic is that they don't really know what to do about me. Typically, I get assigned to Friend Zone faster than you Usain Bolt can run.

What then does this say about sexuality? There are arguments against objectivisation, but does some degree of objectivisation need to be present for something to happen? How much of sexuality is based on conditioning, and how much is based on hardwired reflexes/impulses?

[cosmic_surgeon]

this is all so unimportant, if were all hit with a reset surely peoples need to survive and have the basics would relegate this to unimportance

Sure, just like if I inherited a million pounds I wouldn't need to be worrying about how much the leccy's gonna cost when the bill arrives any day now. But it's pretty unlikely that that's going to happen, so it'd be silly of me not to try and sort out my cash situation - right?

[Pistonsbeneath]

this is all so unimportant, if were all hit with a reset surely peoples need to survive and have the basics would relegate this to unimportance

Sure, just like if I inherited a million pounds I wouldn't need to be worrying about how much the leccy's gonna cost when the bill arrives any day now. But it's pretty unlikely that that's going to happen, so it'd be silly of me not to try and sort out my cash situation - right?

doesn't really work as a reset wouldn't solve equality

[cosmic_surgeon]

this is all so unimportant, if were all hit with a reset surely peoples need to survive and have the basics would relegate this to unimportance

Sure, just like if I inherited a million pounds I wouldn't need to be worrying about how much the leccy's gonna cost when the bill arrives any day now. But it's pretty unlikely that that's going to happen, so it'd be silly of me not to try and sort out my cash situation - right?

doesn't really work as a reset wouldn't solve equality

That doesn't make any sense mate. You trollin' bro?

[LACE]

I'd like to throw out something that might be from a slightly different viewpoint. It bears on the subject of "Ooo boobies!" and "Look at the tits on that!". Frankly speaking, I generally don't talk about women in that way. In fact, I'm downright uncomfortable doing so, and being in the presence of people who do that non-stop. My interest is more on personality and the whole package, rather than specific body parts.

However, this generally leads me to being labelled as "uninterested". One of my oldest friends once described me as asexual. For the record, I'm neither.

This then brings up two things:
1) The impression I get from the male demographic is that I'm slightly odd. Not gay, just odd.
2) The impression I get from the female demographic is that they don't really know what to do about me. Typically, I get assigned to Friend Zone faster than you Usain Bolt can run.

What then does this say about sexuality? There are arguments against objectivisation, but does some degree of objectivisation need to be present for something to happen? How much of sexuality is based on conditioning, and how much is based on hardwired reflexes/impulses?

I don't think so, I think attraction needs to be present for something to happen. I'm not sure exactly how much of sexuality is based on conditioning or hardwired impulses but I do know that lust (even slight objectification) is natural, I'd offer that there's nothing wrong with it, provided that people remain aware that they are a thinking, feeling, human completely separate from whatever fantasies you may have about them. Previous threads here about women indicate that some are incapable of connecting the two, and the responses turn into a misogynistic shit storm.

[Pistonsbeneath]

this is all so unimportant, if were all hit with a reset surely peoples need to survive and have the basics would relegate this to unimportance

Sure, just like if I inherited a million pounds I wouldn't need to be worrying about how much the leccy's gonna cost when the bill arrives any day now. But it's pretty unlikely that that's going to happen, so it'd be silly of me not to try and sort out my cash situation - right?

doesn't really work as a reset wouldn't solve equality

That doesn't make any sense mate. You trollin' bro?

if you inherited a million pounds then that would solve your problem of not having to pay the rent, if we were all hit with a reset it wouldnt solve equality but put it firmly on the backburner as nobody would care

did you understand that? probably not lol