Tuesday, July 26, 2011

Second question about porn

( I'm talking about sex and porn. Tread carefully.)

A few days ago I asked a question about porn. Namely I was asking if a scene I described was degrading or not. I got three responses:

From Clarissa:
If both participants are consenting adults, there is nothing "degrading" about this scenario.

The only culture that uses the word "degrading" to refer to sex is a deeply puritanical one.
From Meticulous Mouser:
I have to agree with Clarissa...there isn't anything degrading about it if both participants are consenting adults. Power play in sex is a turn-on for some people. As long as the participants are cool with it, I see no problem with it. Besides, we all have our kinks.
From James:
Well, if that person being held down wants to be held down, then they must have enough value as a person to get what they want. So yeah...
I'll say that my answer pretty much falls in with what they are saying. If the people involved into it then I'm cool with it.

Now let me mix it up a bit.

This time the porn scene is your basic heterosexual romp. At the end the man gives the woman a facial (in case you don't know in porn lingo a facial is when a man ejaculates on a woman's face).

Now think about whether or not you think that that scene is degrading to women. Next I want to you consider this. Think about crossing paths with a man does not consider this degrading and perhaps even says he would like to do something like that with a consenting partner.

Would you say that that man likes degrading women? And by extension would go as far as to say that since he is into that that would be a sign that he does not respect women in general?

I can't wait to hear some answers.

4 comments:

Clarissa said...

If a person seeks consent before engaging in any sexual practice, I'd say that this is a very respectful person.

The nature of one's sexual preference is not ideological. It's just sexual preference. There are people who are into BDSM or sex with sexually innocent partners or the golden shower or sexual defecation or a facial or anything else. Such a genuine sexual preference doesn't "mean" anything about them and doesn't characterize them as human beings. It's just what they are into sexually. If they can find a consenting partner (or many partners), that's great.

It is a very puritanical thing to do to classify sexual preferences as respectful or not, good or bad. Sex is a value in and of itself. It doesn't have to be used to decipher one's personality or ideology outside of the bedroom.

profacero said...

Consider *enthusiastic* consent, not the *OK, OK, I'll let you do this just so we can then move on* type of "consent".

On the question of whether it is possible to map fantasies to personalities, I'll buck current dogma and say yes ... just not in a simplistic way.

James said...

To me, it would depend on how that man approached the woman about it. If he just...did it, or if he pressured her to do it, then yes, it's absolutely degrading. If he asks and she agrees without much thought, then it's really up to her. I kinda find it wrong for us to decide what's degrading for other people.

April said...

I agree with Clarissa.

A sexual proclivity is only disrespectful if it does not involve consent or personal consideration for the wishes of the sexual partner(s). If a woman wants a guy to ejaculate on her face, I can't see why anyone could justify challenging that desire... assuming it is really a desire of hers, of course. On the other hand, I also see aboslutely no problem with a person agreeing to certain sexual activities that s/he may not be 100% enthusiastic about themeslves, for the sole purpose of doing something to please their partner. Of course, this comes with the caveat that both (or all) people involved are honest and feel comfortable being open about their desires and reservations. Ultimately, I think everything is fair game, as long as it's discussed honestly and respectfully. Regardless of any and all implications. It's the only way in which people can make truly free choices, and to argue against that is, in my opinion, to fight for a dangerously puritanical and censored society.

-->