porn, sexual agency, education

[Liz CA]

I think prostitution should be legalized. It's going to happen anyway, so why not take it out of the shadows? Keeping it there makes it much more dangerous for women.

 

Anecdotally, I have a very good friend who for a time was a call girl, by choice. She was treated as a business woman by the company for which she worked. Neither she nor any of the other women (and maybe men?) were forced to be there, and when she didn't want to do it anymore she walked away. So I know for a fact, from discussing it with my friend, that for some women being a sex worker is a way of expressing sexual agency.  When women who choose to make what they describe as more ethical porn tell us that they do so to feel empowered and to fight against misogynistic porn, why shouldn't we believe them?  Porn is like prostitution, it ain't going anywhere. So why not accept that one genre is preferable to another? Have a more balanced view of it and apply regulations, as France does, for example (looking quickly, it seems the rules are no humiliation, no violence, no subjugation), and thus eliminate the misogynistic and damaging porn?

 

 

This seems to be a different topic than your OP regarding "porn literacy" programs and the general effect of porn on adolescents or adults.

[bibiche]

This seems to be a different topic than your OP regarding "porn literacy" programs and the general effect of porn on adolescents or adults.

 

Rabbit holes are where it's at. ;)

[ChocolateReignRemix]

We do this all the time though.  People can't agree to sell their organs.  They can't agree to sell themselves permanently.  They can't agree to a death contract.  In some places they can't be pregnancy surrogates or sell blood.  They can't agree to be abused.

 

The US maybe is a little freer than some other western countries about those things, but that's a feature of extreme capitalism rather than freedom for people.  But even there many of those things are not allowed and there is heavy regulation, and the reasons are that they are potentially rife for abuse, can cause social damage, and also that they come a little to close to selling the physical body in the same way that slavery does - treating it as an object.

 

 

Deciding what is/is not porn and banning it is a line I don't believe we should be crossing.  And frankly I think people should be allowed to sell their blood and that some form of compensation should be available for organ donation.

[bibiche]

 

As to the question in bold, we should not automatically believe the claims of anyone trying to sell us a product.  Maybe their claims are true, but maybe they aren't.  I sincerely hope that their claims are true.  But personally, I'm just not willing to risk it in this particular case, because the benefit to me is vastly outweighed by the potential harm to others.  For others who do choose to be porn consumers, it is my profound wish that they will at least try to seek out ethically produced materials.

 

Not saying to take them at their word, but to regulate. For the rest, I have to make dinner now, but I will check it out and be back later. Thanks for the resources.

[poppy]

I think prostitution should be legalized. It's going to happen anyway, so why not take it out of the shadows? Keeping it there makes it much more dangerous for women.

 

Anecdotally, I have a very good friend who for a time was a call girl, by choice. She was treated as a business woman by the company for which she worked. Neither she nor any of the other women (and maybe men?) were forced to be there, and when she didn't want to do it anymore she walked away. So I know for a fact, from discussing it with my friend, that for some women being a sex worker is a way of expressing sexual agency.  When women who choose to make what they describe as more ethical porn tell us that they do so to feel empowered and to fight against misogynistic porn, why shouldn't we believe them?  Porn is like prostitution, it ain't going anywhere. So why not accept that one genre is preferable to another? Have a more balanced view of it and apply regulations, as France does, for example (looking quickly, it seems the rules are no humiliation, no violence, no subjugation), and thus eliminate the misogynistic and damaging porn?

 

I had to college classmates who stripped in college for money.  That's an industry where there are worker protections both legally and culturally. Men going to a strip club know that there are boundaries, and know the boundaries are strictly enforced. One of those women is a psychologist now and other other is a full time mom but did get her MA. Neither was coerced, neither is an addict.  Stripping was a short-term, very lucrative job.

 

I'm not pro-stripping, I do not like the idea of 'gentlemen's clubs' i general.But, I have zero problem with people who chose that line of work with their eyes open.

[Greta]

Not saying to take them at their word, but to regulate.

 

Oh, then I agree! (ETA and I’m sorry I misunderstood you.)

 

I had to college classmates who stripped in college for money. That's an industry where there are worker protections both legally and culturally. Men going to a strip club know that there are boundaries, and know the boundaries are strictly enforced. One of those women is a psychologist now and other other is a full time mom but did get her MA. Neither was coerced, neither is an addict. Stripping was a short-term, very lucrative job.

 

I'm not pro-stripping, I do not like the idea of 'gentlemen's clubs' i general.But, I have zero problem with people who chose that line of work with their eyes open.

It’s not a subject I’ve researched, but I’ve certainly gotten the impression that stripping is far, FAR safer for women than prostitution or porn. And I’ve even heard that their median income is much higher, though they are selling “lessâ€. I find that interesting. Edited February 10, 2018 by Greta

[EmseB]

No, not necessarily. But, of course, it can be.  Depends on relationship and power dynamic and a lot of other factors.

 

I don't understand desire the been treated as a "woman" and not a "person" at work. I guess it depends where you work.  All my experience is corporate.

 

Well, for starters, because I am a woman. I might need to pump milk at work. I might need a place in the restroom to deal with my monthly. I might need a bathroom or facilities with privacy from males in order to do those things. I might need to take time off to have a baby. I might need special considerations from my boss if my reproductive capacity and pregnancy causes physical problems for me and I need time off or limited hours or limited physical exertion.

 

Pregnancy aside, in my former workplace, I physically could not do the same tasks males could do, no matter how much I worked out or lifted weights. There were simply things I'd never be able to accomplish because of my biological sex and the limitations it put on my physical capabilities. That doesn't mean I didn't deserve respect, but it did require adjusting the workplace in order that most females could have the job that we had without having to meet male standards or job requirements. They had to limit our duties and standards so that we were allowed to be there at all.

 

And aside from logistical issues, I'm not androgynous and don't feel the need for my biology to be erased in order to be treated with respect. To me, telling people that they should be treated simply as an androgynous "person" instead of male or female is a lot like telling PoC that I don't see color so I treat everyone the same. It's nonsensical and it erases something inherent about a person that they find makes them who they are. At least in some cases.

 

In any case, you were saying above that people should pretend everyone is a man in order for everyone to be respected in the work place. Not just any man, but a man of a certain type. You were not talking about simply making some generic "person" out of everyone, and the implication is that the person deserving of respect is the prototype that everyone must imagine everyone else to be.

 

Weren't we just debating in another thread how important it is to treat people who identify as women as...women?

 

Aside from that fact, in any workplace, for most people, sex and gender have direct implications as to attraction and formed relationships. That is also a simple social and biological reality.

 

Men and women are different. That doesn't mean one or the other commands less respect because of differences. I also don't want to live in a world where what makes me female is somehow deemed irrelevant or unimportant to who I am. But that's more of a personal feeling than anything scientific.

Edited February 10, 2018 by EmseB

[poppy]

Well, for starters, because I am a woman. I might need to pump milk at work. I might need a place in the restroom to deal with my monthly. I might need a bathroom or facilities with privacy from males in order to do those things. I might need to take time off to have a baby. I might need special considerations from my boss if my reproductive capacity and pregnancy causes physical problems for me and I need time off or limited hours or limited physical exertion.

 

Pregnancy aside, in my former workplace, I physically could not do the same tasks males could do, no matter how much I worked out or lifted weights. There were simply things I'd never be able to accomplish because of my biological sex and the limitations it put on my physical capabilities. That doesn't mean I didn't deserve respect, but it did require adjusting the workplace in order that most females could have the job that we had without having to meet male standards or job requirements. They had to limit our duties and standards so that we were allowed to be there at all.

 

And aside from logistical issues, I'm not androgynous and don't feel the need for my biology to be erased in order to be treated with respect. To me, telling people that they should be treated simply as an androgynous "person" instead of male or female is a lot like telling PoC that I don't see color so I treat everyone the same. It's nonsensical and it erases something inherent about a person that they find makes them who they are. At least in some cases.

 

In any case, you were saying above that people should pretend everyone is a man in order for everyone to be respected in the work place. Not just any man, but a man of a certain type. You were not talking about simply making some generic "person" out of everyone, and the implication is that the person deserving of respect is the prototype that everyone must imagine everyone else to be.

 

Weren't we just debating in another thread how important it is to treat people who identify as women as...women?

 

Aside from that fact, in any workplace, for most people, sex and gender have direct implications as to attraction and formed relationships. That is also a simple social and biological reality.

 

Men and women are different. That doesn't mean one or the other commands less respect because of differences. I also don't want to live in a world where what makes me female is somehow deemed irrelevant or unimportant to who I am. But that's more of a personal feeling than anything scientific.

 

It's not a guideline for an employer to treat their employees , it's a guideline for how colleagues should treat each other.    What male standards are you unable to meet because of your biology?

[EmseB]

It's not a guideline for an employer to treat their employees , it's a guideline for how colleagues should treat each other. What male standards are you unable to meet because of your biology?

Wait, so employers need to acknowledge that I'm a woman and treat me as such and give appropriate accommodations, but my co-workers should ignore it? I don't even know how that's possible, much less desirable. I think I'm confused about what your end goal is here, partly because we started down this track with a thought exercise that we should imagine everyone as a man in order to afford them appropriate respect.

 

To be honest, I treat all people with respect, but I can't imagine a person that isn't male or female. It doesn't make sense to me. It makes little sense to me to live my life as if men and women aren't different. So we'll probably not get a hugely fruitful discussion out of this.

[Sandwalker]

Oh, then I agree! (ETA and I’m sorry I misunderstood you.)

 

It’s not a subject I’ve researched, but I’ve certainly gotten the impression that stripping is far, FAR safer for women than prostitution or porn. And I’ve even heard that their median income is much higher, though they are selling “lessâ€. I find that interesting.

I live in a US city renowned for its many strip clubs, many of which are full nude clubs that encourage lap dances. There are VIP rooms where the guys with money can go to privately receive "dances" from one or more women. Sex acts commonly take place in these rooms.

 

The dancers are often addicted to drugs and poor. Many of the clubs actually make women pay them to dance there, and sometimes must even tip share.

 

I know there are exceptions, but most are not going to have fancy careers later in life. The women are going to make less and less as they age out, get a c section scar, etc.

 

There's one club here that specializes in pregnant dancers, another with overweight women. Interestingly, there seem to be voluntarily segregated "black" and "white" strip clubs.

 

I'm a nurse in women's health, and have had a lot of contact with exotic dancers. Oh, and the patrons are welcomed into most of these clubs at 18 years of age. Dancer age is minimum of 18 as well.

 

There are generally no female owners or management in these clubs.

[EmseB]

Back to the topic of the OP, I found this exchange interesting.  There is Christian content in the post, but the bulk of what I found interesting was not that. It was about the entire NYT article, what is available online and what boys/men are viewing and what it does. Skip down to the portion that starts with "UPDATE: A reader comments" if you're not interested in the whole column or Christian commentary.

 

An excerpt:

 

The idea that the boys interviewed by their instructors in the Times piece were being at all honest about what they’d seen and what they thought is just laughable.

...

 

[T]he overwhelming problem with online porn culture is that it promotes a truly intense nihilism in young men about bodies and their own sexuality generally. To be blunt, the entire culture of porn online exists to reduce the male orgasm to the status of defecation – a bodily function to be attended to on a regular basis in privacy to give mild physical relief, but something with no particular value or meaning. And female bodies are likewise so reduced along the way. Sex reduces to plumbing – it is entirely disenchanted. It’s worse than depravity – depravity suggests some kind of actual authoritative meaning to transgress against. The long term effect of porn for a lot of the young guys I encounter is just a pervasive numbing meaninglessness, attached to a kind of limp hedonism. They’re adrift, and their own degrading relationship to their own sexuality because of porn is a major factor in that.

 

 

I think that if sex does reduce only to plumbing or a bodily function, then almost anything is okay. Buy sex, sell sex, regulate sex, ask a friend to help your teenager with sex...whatever...it's just meh.

[marbel]

I know the thread has moved on, and I can't find the exact  comments, but regarding amateur porn that people make for their own enjoyment and then release for others to see, and what harm there is in that.  I've been cooking all afternoon with nothing to entertain myself but thoughts of this thread and occasional interruptions by my family.  :-)  So I'm putting this out here.

 

Years ago, pre-internet, so no links, I read an article about a married couple who decided they wanted to have an open marriage. (I don't remember how I came to read it; I assume my first husband gave it to me as part of his campaign to put us on a similar path, which is part of why we are no longer married.) As part of that, they were going to film themselves making love. This led the wife to think about the way she looked and how she wanted to look on film. She decided she needed to lose weight - OK, that can be a good thing, if she was overweight - because, you know, the camera adds weight.  She went on to discuss certain aspects of her appearance which she felt needed changing for the purposes of the filming.

 

So, already, before they've even started, she's not thinking of sex as something to enjoy with her partner/husband, she's thinking of it as performance, and how to best present herself.  She's not thinking of how to be an attentive, sensitive lover... but how to look great on camera so as to attract... other lovers. 

 

So, no more love-making with her husband, because sex is no longer an expression of love.. just sex as performance art for the sake of... I am not really sure what.  

 

 

Edited February 10, 2018 by marbel

[Entropymama]

Back to the topic of the OP, I found this exchange interesting.  There is Christian content in the post, but the bulk of what I found interesting was not that. It was about the entire NYT article, what is available online and what boys/men are viewing and what it does. Skip down to the portion that starts with "UPDATE: A reader comments" if you're not interested in the whole column or Christian commentary.

 

An excerpt:

 

 

 

I think that if sex does reduce only to plumbing or a bodily function, then almost anything is okay. Buy sex, sell sex, regulate sex, ask a friend to help your teenager with sex...whatever...it's just meh.

 

 

The excerpt didn't come over with the quote, so I've copied it: [T]he overwhelming problem with online porn culture is that it promotes a truly intense nihilism in young men about bodies and their own sexuality generally. To be blunt, the entire culture of porn online exists to reduce the male orgasm to the status of defecation – a bodily function to be attended to on a regular basis in privacy to give mild physical relief, but something with no particular value or meaning. And female bodies are likewise so reduced along the way. Sex reduces to plumbing – it is entirely disenchanted. It’s worse than depravity – depravity suggests some kind of actual authoritative meaning to transgress against. The long term effect of porn for a lot of the young guys I encounter is just a pervasive numbing meaninglessness, attached to a kind of limp hedonism. They’re adrift, and their own degrading relationship to their own sexuality because of porn is a major factor in that.

 

This is excellent, and it perfectly explains my own objection to pornography. The vast majority of people on our planet agree that sex is more than just a biological function. Even those who reject a Christian world view generally agree to some kind of spiritual function to it - the joining of two people, not just an enjoyable physical experience. Science backs this up - chemistry, neurons, emotions, etc. 

 

Porn disregards the idea that sexual intimacy is anything but a physical interaction, one that can be exploited for monetary gain. It turns something intimate and generous into performance. As Marbel stated, the participants are no longer focused on one another, but on an audience, on what can be gained. There is no thought to the pleasure of one's partner, or even, really, to one's own pleasure (which would be selfish, but at least understandable) but to the pleasure of whomever is paying for it. It robs both the participants and the viewers of the joy that is real intimacy, and that is a travesty.

 

I reject the entirety of the worldview that reduces sex to something so base. 

[gardenmom5]

I thought this article was timely - about amsterdam's s3x district.  and their finally admitting "the happy hooker" is a myth - and most are trafficked.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5376077/Amsterdam-call-time-myth-happy-hooker.html

 

[Greta]

I live in a US city renowned for its many strip clubs, many of which are full nude clubs that encourage lap dances. There are VIP rooms where the guys with money can go to privately receive "dances" from one or more women. Sex acts commonly take place in these rooms.

 

The dancers are often addicted to drugs and poor. Many of the clubs actually make women pay them to dance there, and sometimes must even tip share.

 

I know there are exceptions, but most are not going to have fancy careers later in life. The women are going to make less and less as they age out, get a c section scar, etc.

 

There's one club here that specializes in pregnant dancers, another with overweight women. Interestingly, there seem to be voluntarily segregated "black" and "white" strip clubs.

 

I'm a nurse in women's health, and have had a lot of contact with exotic dancers. Oh, and the patrons are welcomed into most of these clubs at 18 years of age. Dancer age is minimum of 18 as well.

 

There are generally no female owners or management in these clubs.

Well that’s a very different picture than what was painted for me (friend of a friend kind of thing, I don’t think I’ve ever known anyone personally who has done that). That’s too bad, but I suppose not surprising. :( That is very telling, isn’t it, that women don’t own or manage the clubs.

[Bluegoat]

No.

• Countries with legalized prostitution are associated with higher human trafficking inflows than countries where prostitution is prohibited. The scale effect of legalizing prostitution, i.e. expansion of the market, outweighs the substitution effect, where legal sex workers are favored over illegal workers. On average, countries with legalized prostitution report a greater incidence of human trafficking inflows.
• Criminalization of prostitution in Sweden resulted in the shrinking of the prostitution market and the decline of human trafficking inflows. Cross-country comparisons of Sweden with Denmark (where prostitution is decriminalized) and Germany (expanded legalization of prostitution) are consistent with the quantitative analysis, showing that trafficking inflows decreased with criminalization and increased with legalization.

 

From:  https://journalistsresource.org/studies/international/human-rights/legalized-prostitution-human-trafficking-inflows

 

This source also says that legalization markedly increases the occurrence of prostitution, legalization does not reduce the rates of murder and violence against prostitutes, and legalization does not change the typical power dynamic between the buyers (educated and financially well-off) and the providers (uneducated and poor).

 

 

 

 

 

 

As to the question in bold, we should not automatically believe the claims of anyone trying to sell us a product.  Maybe their claims are true, but maybe they aren't.  I sincerely hope that their claims are true.  But personally, I'm just not willing to risk it in this particular case, because the benefit to me is vastly outweighed by the potential harm to others.  For others who do choose to be porn consumers, it is my profound wish that they will at least try to seek out ethically produced materials.

 

As to the question in blue, I do accept that one genre is preferable to another, and I specifically stated that I would like to see revenge porn and porn that depicts violence disappear.  I have no idea how to make that happen, though.  

 

Something that people don't always talk about with legalization, be it prostitution, cannabis, etc.  Very often, when something is legalized, it really changes the social attitude, especially if you wait 10 or 20 years.  Unless you are very careful, people are not thinking "Oh, well, X is really a social problem that we've decriminalized in order to avoid certain bad effects.  Even with decriminalization, and especially with legalization/regulation, people tend to assume that X is now ok, a right, something that should be accepted by the general public as good or harmless.

 

I'm not sure why it is that people do this - I've wondered if it was always the case or whether it's something relatively new that so man people feel that what is legal corresponds so well to what we think is right or good.

[ktgrok]

I can't claim a non religious viewpoint, but I don't think ou have to be religious to think that buying and selling human bodies is not good. 

[Bluegoat]

If I'm a dancer and someone asks me to dance for them , that's different than if I'm a software engineer and someone asks me to dance for them. Don't you think?

 

It might be unexpected if you are a software engineer.  But why shouldn't someone ask you if you'd like to dance, if that is a harmless thing to ask people to do?  You could always say no - you aren't even being pressured by finances or having a job if it's recreational dancing.

 

Sex is either something that we can separate from relationship and intimacy and make agreements among adults to do, or it isn't (that is, either it is, or it's more complicated.)  An industry based on sexual exchange for money is going to be more fraught and prone to abuse than adults negotiating social exchange.  If we don't think the latter is possible without really significant protections - like totally divorcing it from the workplace - it seems pretty crazy to think we can make the former work.

[Greta]

I thought this article was timely - about amsterdam's s3x district.  and their finally admitting "the happy hooker" is a myth - and most are trafficked.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5376077/Amsterdam-call-time-myth-happy-hooker.html

 

 

This article addresses the idea that we should all just consume so called feminist porn as a way of solving the porn problem. It's quite cogent, I think.

 

http://www.feministcurrent.com/2015/07/17/so-what-if-your-porn-is-feminist/

 

 

 

Both of those articles were good, and the latter one included some good links as well. 

 

This topic is thoroughly depressing.  My very innocent 18yo daughter is doing math homework with her dad right now, and I'm just trying not to panic about what her future holds.  I always thought that my generation had it sooooo much better than my grandmothers' generation, because we didn't have to put up with as much overt chauvinism and discrimination as they did.  But I never imagined that my daughter's generation would have to survive the kind of misogyny that is now spreading through our culture like the black plague.  It makes me just want to hide her away from the world.  (I don't mean that literally, of course, I'm just whining.  Because I'm scared.)

[Greta]

Something that people don't always talk about with legalization, be it prostitution, cannabis, etc.  Very often, when something is legalized, it really changes the social attitude, especially if you wait 10 or 20 years.  Unless you are very careful, people are not thinking "Oh, well, X is really a social problem that we've decriminalized in order to avoid certain bad effects.  Even with decriminalization, and especially with legalization/regulation, people tend to assume that X is now ok, a right, something that should be accepted by the general public as good or harmless.

 

I'm not sure why it is that people do this - I've wondered if it was always the case or whether it's something relatively new that so man people feel that what is legal corresponds so well to what we think is right or good.

 

Yes, using the cannabis example, when I was younger I was very pro-legalization.  But there were taboos in place, in my mind and in society, that are now breaking down.  My feelings on that issue are far more complex now.  I think that people do get the idea that if something is legal, then it's basically okay, benign, not really a big deal.  Perhaps because in an increasingly secular culture, we look more to the law and less to religion and history for our mores?  

 

 

Sex is either something that we can separate from relationship and intimacy and make agreements among adults to do, or it isn't (that is, either it is, or it's more complicated.)  An industry based on sexual exchange for money is going to be more fraught and prone to abuse than adults negotiating social exchange.  If we don't think the latter is possible without really significant protections - like totally divorcing it from the workplace - it seems pretty crazy to think we can make the former work.

 

 

Well said.

[Catwoman]

I had to college classmates who stripped in college for money. That's an industry where there are worker protections both legally and culturally. Men going to a strip club know that there are boundaries, and know the boundaries are strictly enforced. One of those women is a psychologist now and other other is a full time mom but did get her MA. Neither was coerced, neither is an addict. Stripping was a short-term, very lucrative job.

 

I'm not pro-stripping, I do not like the idea of 'gentlemen's clubs' i general.But, I have zero problem with people who chose that line of work with their eyes open.

I’m not sure where you live, but I’m friends with a county prosecutor who has told me that there are widespread problems with strip clubs essentially being fronts for prostitution and drugs.

 

Maybe your friends were lucky, but I’ll bet they saw a lot of stuff going on that they didn’t want to talk about for fear that their friends might think they were doing it, too. Let’s face it, while there are some young women like your friends who take those jobs as a way to pay for college, I would guess that the vast majority are not doing it as a path toward a better future, but that they do it because they aren’t educated or skilled at doing anything else, and they don’t realize that they may be trapping themselves into a dead end job with no happy ending, because they are lured in by the prospect of making quick money.

 

Sure, the bouncers keep the customers from touching the dancers while they’re on stage or walking around in the club trying to get men to pay for “private dances,†but once the women are alone in those back rooms with the men... well... let’s just say there’s often a lot more than lap dances going on back there.

 

I don’t think it’s a good idea to glorify those jobs in any way or to suggest that they are a good way for a young woman to make money. Would you really want one of your own children to work in that industry, even if she “went into it with her eyes open?†I know I wouldn’t.

Edited February 11, 2018 by Catwoman

[gardenmom5]

Both of those articles were good, and the latter one included some good links as well. 

 

This topic is thoroughly depressing.  My very innocent 18yo daughter is doing math homework with her dad right now, and I'm just trying not to panic about what her future holds.  I always thought that my generation had it sooooo much better than my grandmothers' generation, because we didn't have to put up with as much overt chauvinism and discrimination as they did.  But I never imagined that my daughter's generation would have to survive the kind of misogyny that is now spreading through our culture like the black plague.  It makes me just want to hide her away from the world.  (I don't mean that literally, of course, I'm just whining.  Because I'm scared.)

 

 

I personally think it is tied to the increasing prevalence of p0rn.    look at how the harvey weinstiens/matt lauer's et al view women - as the source of their orga$m - and they get off on the force and dominance of it.

to them - women aren't equals, and they seem incapable of viewing any woman as an equal.  i do think that is something that comes with serious consumption of a product that very much objectifies women.   and those producing it - treat them like meat.  even the "so-called" feminist who thinks she's doing women a service, maybe she doesn't beat them, but she's still selling women's bodies for money.   and she's the one making the money.

[poppy]

This thread is so weird.  Totally OK to ask coworkers to perform an exotic dance, they can say no!  Totally not OK for a woman to chose to make money on dancing, because it's definitely 99.99% coerced? I do not get it.

[poppy]

I know the thread has moved on, and I can't find the exact  comments, but regarding amateur porn that people make for their own enjoyment and then release for others to see, and what harm there is in that.  I've been cooking all afternoon with nothing to entertain myself but thoughts of this thread and occasional interruptions by my family.  :-)  So I'm putting this out here.

 

Years ago, pre-internet, so no links, I read an article about a married couple who decided they wanted to have an open marriage. (I don't remember how I came to read it; I assume my first husband gave it to me as part of his campaign to put us on a similar path, which is part of why we are no longer married.) As part of that, they were going to film themselves making love. This led the wife to think about the way she looked and how she wanted to look on film. She decided she needed to lose weight - OK, that can be a good thing, if she was overweight - because, you know, the camera adds weight.  She went on to discuss certain aspects of her appearance which she felt needed changing for the purposes of the filming.

 

So, already, before they've even started, she's not thinking of sex as something to enjoy with her partner/husband, she's thinking of it as performance, and how to best present herself.  She's not thinking of how to be an attentive, sensitive lover... but how to look great on camera so as to attract... other lovers. 

 

So, no more love-making with her husband, because sex is no longer an expression of love.. just sex as performance art for the sake of... I am not really sure what.  

 

 

It's similarly true that most people on stage in all walks of life -- bar bands, musicals, etc --- care about appearance.  Are you morally opposed to all that as well? 

[Catwoman]

This thread is so weird.  Totally OK to ask coworkers to perform an exotic dance, they can say no!  Totally not OK for a woman to chose to make money on dancing, because it's definitely 99.99% coerced? I do not get it.

Who said anything about it being totally ok to ask coworkers to perform an exotic dance? :confused:

[EmseB]

I can't claim a non religious viewpoint, but I don't think ou have to be religious to think that buying and selling human bodies is not good.

Well, part of the reason I am religious is because I think that in order to declare some action objectively good or bad, moral or immoral, one has to have a transcendent moral standard of absolutes. I personally couldn't/can't reconcile such a standard with a strictly material universe. But THAT is waaaaay down the rabbit trail.

[eternalsummer]

You don't have to be religious to think the universe has moral absolutes, or that the universe is other than strictly material.  see Spinoza's conception of God, etc.

 

I see religion as a framework through which something essential to humanity is transmitted.  There are elements common to most/all religions; that is not an accident, imo.

[DawnM]

Who said anything about it being totally ok to ask coworkers to perform an exotic dance? :confused:

 

Wait, your coworkers don't ask you to perform exotic dances?  Huh!  

 

(Sorry, I couldn't resist!)

[DawnM]

This thread is so weird.  Totally OK to ask coworkers to perform an exotic dance, they can say no!  Totally not OK for a woman to chose to make money on dancing, because it's definitely 99.99% coerced? I do not get it.

 

Nope!  Neither is ok.

[Catwoman]

Wait, your coworkers don't ask you to perform exotic dances? Huh!

 

(Sorry, I couldn't resist!)

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Nothing to see here, people. Nothing to see here... :leaving:

[kiwik]

I completely and absolutely disagree that any adult woman should be “teaching†our teenaged sons how to please their future sex partners, even if it’s just verbal discussions. Frankly, I find the idea utterly repulsive. I don’t have a daughter, but I wouldn’t want an adult woman coaching my teen dd on how to behave with men, either. As her mother, I would feel that was my job.

 

How about if parents raised their kids to be kind and generous and thoughtful PEOPLE instead of focusing on their sexual performance?

 

I completely disagree that a mother can’t have discussions with her son about how to treat women with respect, which is probably the biggest factor in whether or not men treat women as sexual objects or as equal partners. The conversations don’t have to be detailed discussions about sex to get that point across. Obviously, it’s great if the son also has a father as a positive role model, as well, but that’s not always possible.)

Mm. I think you are going a bit further than I am. I am thinking more along the lines of - very few women find force attractive no matter what movies say, No actually should be taken to mean no, time should be spent actually getting to know the person before you try to seduce them. The younger person could then ask questions like "my friend told me girls can't get pregnant the first time", "I should let a man ... If I love him" and the other person could help them work through those issues. I am not suggesting instruction on how to be a good lover physically mor to think about whether what they think they know is true or right.

 

If it helps I can't think of anyone suitable to do this so I will have to do it myself since the boy's father is not around.

 

But I cannot teach them many things about relationships because I do not have healthy petsonal relationships myself and neither did my parents. I am really not sure what a good marriage looks like.

Edited February 11, 2018 by kiwik

[GoodGrief]

You don't have to be religious to think the universe has moral absolutes, or that the universe is other than strictly material.  see Spinoza's conception of God, etc.

 

I see religion as a framework through which something essential to humanity is transmitted.  There are elements common to most/all religions; that is not an accident, imo.

 

You don't have to be religious to see that some behaviors destroy the framework that allows us to care for each other in society, and allow weaker members to flourish along with the strong. The secret sauce of humanity is that our minds move us past the function of mere biological urges.

[Catwoman]

Mm. I think you are going a bit further than I am. I am thinking more along the lines of - very few women find force attractive no matter what movies say, No actually should be taken to mean no, time should be spent actually getting to know the person before you try to seduce them. The younger person could then ask questions like "my friend told me girls can't get pregnant the first time", "I should let a man ... If I love him" and the other person could help them work through those issues. I am not suggesting instruction on how to be a good lover physically mor to think about whether what they think they know is true or right.

 

If it helps I can't think of anyone suitable to do this so I will have to do it myself since the boy's father is not around.

Thanks for clarifying! :)

 

I think you’ll do just fine with your son. It doesn’t have to be a big, formal discussion or anything. I think as long as you have a good relationship with him and he knows he can be open with you and not feel embarrassed to ask questions, he will turn out just fine! Also, I’m sure he loves and respects you, and that’s probably an excellent indicator of how he will treat the other girls and women in his life.

[kiwik]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

 

Nothing to see here, people. Nothing to see here... :leaving:

I have had co workers threaten to send someone to rape me or pluck out my pubic hair with pliers and not see that it was wrong. I have also had my boss deny it was possible that the work mate could have been inappropriate because he had known h for 16 years and me only for one.

 

There are plentiful creeps out there who know they will get away with it.

[Catwoman]

I have had co workers threaten to send someone to rape me or pluck out my pubic hair with pliers and not see that it was wrong. I have also had my boss deny it was possible that the work mate could have been inappropriate because he had known h for 16 years and me only for one.

 

There are plentiful creeps out there who know they will get away with it.

Wow! That is AWFUL!!! I’m so sorry those things happened to you!!! :grouphug:

[Word Nerd]

This thread is so weird. Totally OK to ask coworkers to perform an exotic dance, they can say no! Totally not OK for a woman to chose to make money on dancing, because it's definitely 99.99% coerced? I do not get it.

No one said that. You missed the point of the post.

[DawnM]

I have had co workers threaten to send someone to rape me or pluck out my pubic hair with pliers and not see that it was wrong. I have also had my boss deny it was possible that the work mate could have been inappropriate because he had known h for 16 years and me only for one.

 

There are plentiful creeps out there who know they will get away with it.

 

What?  I can't even imagine.  I have never had a coworker say anything of the kind.

[brehon]

Kiwik, my eldest son asked me to explain wet dreams to him when he was, hmmm, older tween/younger teen. He also wanted to know what porn was and how to tell if a girl "liked" him. That was an interesting conversation, lemme tell you. I asked him why he didn't ask his dad - my dh - and his reply was that he felt more comfortable with me. ( 💙 happy momma sigh...)

 

I was upfront about the fact that I had never been a teenaged boy ("duh, Mom") and could only explain some of what he was asking about from a physiological point of view. There were, however, good discussions about porn and its deleterious effects on developing brains, "liking" girls, respect, relationships, etc. I think I somewhat botched the wet dream aspect, though. I also encouraged my son to talk to his dad, who was more than willing to have these conversations.

 

Anyway, I think my rather rambling point is that you'll be great for your son. Sometimes parents have to deal with the growing pains of their opposite sex children. It can be awkward, but love covers a multitude of gaffes.

[marbel]

It's similarly true that most people on stage in all walks of life -- bar bands, musicals, etc --- care about appearance.  Are you morally opposed to all that as well? 

 

Are you serious?

 

In case you are, no, I'm not opposed to that at all.There is nothing wrong with people caring about their appearance and of course performers are interested in the image they present

 

The woman in the example I gave became concerned about her appearance when she decided she was going to be filmed having sex with her husband, and anticipated that those films would be seen by others. Her focus shifted from pleasing her husband to pleasing her audience. As I said before (not that I expect you or anyone else to remember anything I've said), I consider sex to be a private act, not a performance for an audience.

 

If you can't see the difference - and I don't mean if you don't agree with me, I expect you will disagree - then there's nothing else to say.

 

 

[EmseB]

You don't have to be religious to think the universe has moral absolutes, or that the universe is other than strictly material. see Spinoza's conception of God, etc.

 

I see religion as a framework through which something essential to humanity is transmitted. There are elements common to most/all religions; that is not an accident, imo.

Right, and I realized from your reply that I didn't finish my thought. That is that it is interesting that people from varied philosophies can come to the same conclusion that, say, something is universally bad or good.

 

In the case of this topic, porn being bad has long been painted as a puritanical, prudish religious construct.

[Greta]

I personally think it is tied to the increasing prevalence of p0rn. look at how the harvey weinstiens/matt lauer's et al view women - as the source of their orga$m - and they get off on the force and dominance of it.

to them - women aren't equals, and they seem incapable of viewing any woman as an equal. i do think that is something that comes with serious consumption of a product that very much objectifies women. and those producing it - treat them like meat. even the "so-called" feminist who thinks she's doing women a service, maybe she doesn't beat them, but she's still selling women's bodies for money. and she's the one making the money.

I agree. That article that you linked referred to legalized prostitution as “commercialized rape†and I think that’s true. And if 88% of porn depicts violence and aggression, then that’s basically commercialized rape too. And when that becomes universally available and widely consumed, of course it is going to bleed over into public life and threaten women’s roles and our very safety. How could it not?

[Bluegoat]

You don't have to be religious to think the universe has moral absolutes, or that the universe is other than strictly material.  see Spinoza's conception of God, etc.

 

I see religion as a framework through which something essential to humanity is transmitted.  There are elements common to most/all religions; that is not an accident, imo.

 

I think that gets into the question of what it means to "be religious".  For a lot of people, what they mean is a belief or affirmation of those kind of underlying formal principles, and not so much the institutional aspect of religion.  Spinoza had plenty to say about religion, and his conception of God isn't that far removed from that of many other philosophies or philosophical religions - there's more than a family resemblance.  It's kind of interesting that  for a lot of moderns, belief in a Platonic or Spinozian God seems to be described as atheism.  It's seems like a significant historical change.

 

I think you are right about the function of religion (or one of it's major functions) - religious practice is a way for people to transmit those ideas in a way that is fairly accessible, and also gives some direction in terms of individual way of life, and the communal way of life of people.  A lot of moral/ethical practice in religion - for example around sexuality as we're discussing here - is based very much on the kinds of principles like the nature of sexuality, how human freedom operates, etc.  Many people are not really interested in examining questions like that in detail or using very academic language to do so.  And it's hard to function as a community to make decisions about questions like this without some common language or references to talk about such things.

Edited February 11, 2018 by Bluegoat

[Bluegoat]

This thread is so weird.  Totally OK to ask coworkers to perform an exotic dance, they can say no!  Totally not OK for a woman to chose to make money on dancing, because it's definitely 99.99% coerced? I do not get it.

 

No one's said anything about that.  If you meant exotic dancing in your post about dancers and engineers, you didn't make that clear.

 

The point being made is there seems to be a significant gap between these two conceptions that we are being asked as a society, and also by individuals, to hold together.  

 

It could be that those who want to ban all touching, jokes that mention sex, and dating co-workers are right, but if they are it is hard to see how that could be compatible with a sex industry.

 

It could be that those who think the sex industry could work are right, but if they are, it is hard to see how that is compatible with a view that sees the need to take such a paternalistic view of women in other work contexts.

 

 

Personally, I think the sex industry is incompatible with human dignity, it comes far too close to selling the body in a direct way, and it's too prone to abuse, to damaging individuals, and to systematic abuses.  Commodification of sex is intrinsically a problem.  

I also think that while there should be certain kinds of protections and limits in workplaces and even social environments, they need to stop short of overt paternalism, and that making them work will mean both men and women accepting greater social controls of their behaviour and greater self-discipline to create a different kind of environment.  I also think this kind of combination of respectful social approach to sex and the self-discipline required to have it work come from an ability to set limits on one's sexual expression and place it within a larger order, and I think pornography undermines that capacity in individuals.

[eternalsummer]

I think that gets into the question of what it means to "be religious".  For a lot of people, what they mean is a belief or affirmation of those kind of underlying formal principles, and not so much the institutional aspect of religion.  Spinoza had plenty to say about religion, and his conception of God isn't that far removed from that of many other philosophies or philosophical religions - there's more than a family resemblance.  It's kind of interesting that  for a lot of moderns, belief in a Platonic or Spinozian God seems to be described as atheism.  It's seems like a significant historical change.

 

I think you are right about the function of religion (or one of it's major functions) - religious practice is a way for people to transmit those ideas in a way that is fairly accessible, and also gives some direction in terms of individual way of life, and the communal way of life of people.  A lot of moral/ethical practice in religion - for example around sexuality as we're discussing here - is based very much on the kinds of principles like the nature of sexuality, how human freedom operates, etc.  Many people are not really interested in examining questions like that in detail or using very academic language to do so.  And it's hard to function as a community to make decisions about questions like this without some common language or references to talk about such things.

 

 

Yes, I find that strange too.  I don't know much about the history of philosophy or theology, but I definitely do not consider myself an atheist - there was a distinct shift in my thinking and belief at one point, between atheism and belief.  I am not religious nor do I have a specific religious belief (that is to say, I'm not a Christian who believes in Christ as the savior just doesn't go to church, nor a Jew who believes in the Abraham of the Bible but doesn't practice Judaism) - but I am just as clearly, to me, not an atheist.

 

Anyway, all of that said, I think part of the reason it has become difficult to talk about and decide on underlying moral principles that should guide behavior is precisely because the institutions of religion have lost a lot of power in the last few generations (along with other institutions, for that matter); it's not that we don't have common ground, exactly, but that it becomes hard to talk about our common ground because we filter it through much different lenses than previously.

[gardenmom5]

Mm. I think you are going a bit further than I am. I am thinking more along the lines of - very few women find force attractive no matter what movies say, No actually should be taken to mean no, time should be spent actually getting to know the person before you try to seduce them. The younger person could then ask questions like "my friend told me girls can't get pregnant the first time", "I should let a man ... If I love him" and the other person could help them work through those issues. I am not suggesting instruction on how to be a good lover physically mor to think about whether what they think they know is true or right.

 

If it helps I can't think of anyone suitable to do this so I will have to do it myself since the boy's father is not around.

 

But I cannot teach them many things about relationships because I do not have healthy petsonal relationships myself and neither did my parents. I am really not sure what a good marriage looks like.

 

I recently came across this article  on successful long-term relationships  - which you might find interesting and useful.

 

that respect for your partner is more important than communication, rings true to me.

 

I think trust can be added to that.

I can think of a few women dh and i have tried to counsel over the years who were in bad relationships.  each one "loved them" - didn't trust them, but refused to leave becasue "they loved them."  bad situations.

 

 

I have had co workers threaten to send someone to rape me or pluck out my pubic hair with pliers and not see that it was wrong. I have also had my boss deny it was possible that the work mate could have been inappropriate because he had known h for 16 years and me only for one.

 

There are plentiful creeps out there who know they will get away with it.

 

I'm so sorry.

 

brings to mind the thread on how pedophiles get away with abusing their victims in front of other people/the parents.   people see what they expect to see.