Porn induced erectile dysfunction

[garbon]

I really like being asked "Where do you want it?" I always want to ask if they can use a hand towel.

[Ideologue]

There's a place for you in the church.  WTF.  You're a gay man.  That makes double no sense.

[garbon]

There's a place for you in the church.  WTF.  You're a gay man.  That makes double no sense.

Being gay doesn't mean I want to wear semen. Nor does it mean I want to make polite conversation (or any conversation) while having sex.

[Jacob]

"yeah, I know it's kinda dirty, but it really does it for me; tell me what gets you off, and I'll do that too; let's push boundaries together"

Oh, Jake.

(I'd phrase it differently, of course)

[Tonitrus]

"yeah, I know it's kinda dirty, but it really does it for me; tell me what gets you off, and I'll do that too; let's push boundaries together"

Oh, Jake.

(I'd phrase it differently, of course)

How?  That's about as tame as it can get. 

[Jacob]

I couldn't live with someone so disgusted by semen that they wouldn't take it anywhere.  It's unromantic, awkward, and arguably even rude.  They might as well join a nunnery.  Or the priesthood, I guess.  But is it "wrong"?  "Wrong" implies a moral judgment.  Being dissatisfied with someone's sexual acumen is not, strictly speaking, a moral judgment.

Does "take it anywhere" include "inside the vagina" and/or "inside a condom inside the vagina"? Or are you seriously suggesting that not wanting ejaculate squirted on you is unromantic, awkward, and possibly even rude?

[Jacob]

"yeah, I know it's kinda dirty, but it really does it for me; tell me what gets you off, and I'll do that too; let's push boundaries together"

Oh, Jake.

(I'd phrase it differently, of course)

How?  That's about as tame as it can get. 

It's not so much about the tameness as it is about time and place and picking the words that are appropriate for the specific context.

[dps]

And I would be SHOCKED to find out facials did not exist prior to the film medium.

I'm sure they existed, but I'm pretty confident they were not considered "normal" acts. If they are now, that's an example of the normative influence of porn.

Yeah, I agree.  Ide's view on this is skewed because he's young enough that hardcore porn was already fairly easily available by the time he was old enough to be interested.  When I was in HS and even college, to view hardcore you basically had to go to a porn theater--VCRs existed, but they were quite expensive and not very common before the mid-80s, and hardly anyone had heard of the internet (and I doubt there was much porn on the net at the time, if for no other reason that transfer rates were so low that there wouldn't have been much point).

[MadImmortalMan]

The ladies Ide's age had the same experience he did. Don't be misogynistic.

[Jacob]

The ladies Ide's age had the same experience he did. Don't be misogynistic.

That's a bit of a non-sequiteur.

Also, misogynistic is not the same as sexist.

[Tonitrus]

And I would be SHOCKED to find out facials did not exist prior to the film medium.

I'm sure they existed, but I'm pretty confident they were not considered "normal" acts. If they are now, that's an example of the normative influence of porn.

Yeah, I agree.  Ide's view on this is skewed because he's young enough that hardcore porn was already fairly easily available by the time he was old enough to be interested.  When I was in HS and even college, to view hardcore you basically had to go to a porn theater--VCRs existed, but they were quite expensive and not very common before the mid-80s, and hardly anyone had heard of the internet (and I doubt there was much porn on the net at the time, if for no other reason that transfer rates were so low that there wouldn't have been much point).

It was a hard time when your nudie pictures were in ASCII. 

[Syt]

Then you're talking about a relatively small subset of porn.  Porn featuring explicit lack of consent is an extremely, vanishly small niche, at least going by xhamster.  I've stumbled across actively violent porn maybe once or twice (thanks Japan).

There's a surprising amount of (non-BDSM) Western porn that features rough sex that includes aggressive choking and face punching. Even though it's not really depicted as rape I find it's a major turn off.

[Martinus]

But unless you haven't looked into it--and there's no reason for you to have, I guess--the vast, vast majority of porn is regular old sex jazzed up with a cinematic presentation.  Or at least the same kind of sex I've had with pretty much every partner I've ever had.  (Only one had an objection to facials, but did swallow.)

I think your liking of facials are a good indication of how porn has influenced sex, since they're pretty much the definition of an porn-like act performed for the camera. That you have developed such an attachment to that act is, I'd wager, down to your consumption of porn.

Now, I'm not saying it's particularly unhealthy, but it's a good illustration of how that influences how people approach sex.

I don't think that it's beyond the pale to assume that other acts and the general attitudes shown in porn also influences attitudes, especially in young people (and I believe a few people in this thread have said studies support that assumption).

Also, I think your assertion that most porn is "just two people fucking" is a little blithe - you've got all kinds of racial fetishization, all kinds of dominance and submission, all kinds of humiliation porn, all kinds of class and race conflicts, hints at inappropriate ages etc etc.

It's not that any given one of those types of porn are inherently "bad" - what consenting adults get off to is their business, as are their fantasies - but the aggregate of all this stuff nonetheless creates the illusion that there are all these hot chicks out there just gagging for your cock exactly the way that gets you off.

I wouldn't be surprised if the rise of the MRA, incels, red pill, PUA and other assorted masculinist losers is at least partially down to the prevalence of porn - their view of women and sex seems pretty consistent with the way they're depicted in porn these days at least.

But you can look at it differently as well. I remember being drawn to what are now my fetishes from a relatively early age (although at the time it was not fully sexualised). I have not started to look at porn I liked until I was in my early to mid twenties (thanks, Internet) but once I did, it convinced me my fetishes are not that uncommon and I was finally able to acknowledge them rather than being ashamed of them.

At the same time, no amount of gay porn has convinced me to like anal.

I can see how younger kids may be obviously affected negatively by porn, but for older teens/young adults I think it can actually be quite beneficial in coming to terms with one's sexuality (which, interestingly, seems to be more difficult for straight people than openly gay people).

[Martinus]

And I would be SHOCKED to find out facials did not exist prior to the film medium.

I'm sure they existed, but I'm pretty confident they were not considered "normal" acts. If they are now, that's an example of the normative influence of porn.

... and it's a bit of a pity, really, because if facials are "everyday vanilla sex" that takes away the transgressive frisson.

The same has been said about gay sex or interracial sex. It does not mean this is a bad thing.

I think we mainly dispute the article's (and the "conservative Canadians'") apparent (apparent, because they are too prudish to say this explicitly) assertion that normalising a broader range of consensual sexual practices is a bad thing.

[Martinus]

I really like being asked "Where do you want it?" I always want to ask if they can use a hand towel.

I gotta say I feel the same. 

In general, I tend to agree with Quentin Crisp that sex is just a poor substitute for masturbation.