Misogynistic porn

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

No, what is wrong is that it is depicting most women in a submissive role. Showing the occasional women in a submissive role is perfectly fine, because there are quite a few women interested in being submissive. However, showing almost all women in that manner is absolutely ridiculous and spreading absurd stereotypes about how the average woman behaves and what the average woman desires. The vast majority is targeted exclusively towards men, despite the fact that a rather significant percentage of women enjoy pornography as well.

Yup.

Beyond that, a lot of male Dom/female sub porn goes WAY past "entertaining BDSM dynamic" and into the realm of "jesus christ this is some creepy shit." Speaking as someone who really ought to be in the target market for such porn, I pretty quickly gave up trying to find anything watchable, because a disturbingly large percentage of it seems to be less wank-fuel than nightmare-fuel, less "watch a dude dominate a chick in sexy ways" and more "watch a dude abuse a stupid fucking whore, which is all women are, fuck them all, worthless bitches."

I am glad I am not the only one.

I'd also failed to mention how straight BDSM porn scene is really way more sick than the gay one. I was trying not to be offensive and/or homocentric.

[IshCong]

No, what is wrong is that it is depicting most women in a submissive role. Showing the occasional women in a submissive role is perfectly fine, because there are quite a few women interested in being submissive. However, showing almost all women in that manner is absolutely ridiculous and spreading absurd stereotypes about how the average woman behaves and what the average woman desires. The vast majority is targeted exclusively towards men, despite the fact that a rather significant percentage of women enjoy pornography as well.

Yup.

Beyond that, a lot of male Dom/female sub porn goes WAY past "entertaining BDSM dynamic" and into the realm of "jesus christ this is some creepy shit." Speaking as someone who really ought to be in the target market for such porn, I pretty quickly gave up trying to find anything watchable, because a disturbingly large percentage of it seems to be less wank-fuel than nightmare-fuel, less "watch a dude dominate a chick in sexy ways" and more "watch a dude abuse a stupid fucking whore, which is all women are, fuck them all, worthless bitches."

It's almost like fetishes are subjective and what is entertaining to one party is creepy shit to another and that even within a fetish group there are gradations such that some people like a fetish to a greater extent than others who like that fetish.

[Threlizdun]

No, what is wrong is that it is depicting most women in a submissive role.

How? If submissive porn of women isn't bad, then it follows that lots of people liking it isn't a problem. It does not make a moral difference if one or one billion people like a particular sexual fetish. Only whether or not that fetish can be said to be moral, immoral, or amoral.

The rest of your post doesn't really matter, because at best it's a complaint about a lack of critical thinking in society, and certain individuals inability or refusal to differentiate between reality and fiction. That's not grounds to complain about the popularity of a sexual interest though. What is this hipster nonsense?

A small minority of videos depicting submissive women is a specific niche. The vast majority showing such a trend is social commentary. It goes from, t"his is how some women act and how a select few desire them to" to "this is how all women act and how they should be treated".

If you do not believe it applies in this circumstance, let's switch this aspect of pornography with something else. Rape fantasies are a thing, and there is quite a bit of pornography out there that depict it. However, it's clearly just a fantasy for most. It's rather isolated, and many who have them express no desire to act upon them. However, imagine that the vast majority of pornograhy depicted rape. This moves beyond a fetish and enters a horrifying new territory of how an entire industry depicts something. The numbers matter here, and their significance is truly terrifying at times.

[IshCong]

I'm wondering what sort of 'average straight porn' you're looking at if it looks like BDSM. A bit of a dominant-submissive personality duo doesn't make something BDSM. It takes a quite a bit more than that.
I also imagine that if a great minority of people were not interested in that sort of porn, it would not be the average simply because it wouldn't sell as well. The sort of porn that the majority of people are interested in would be the average, logically.

I'm in-between gay and straight, you know, so I thought it would be clearer for anyone.

Buttsex. Especially to the guy's butt. *blushes*

I'm still pretty sure you're confusing what BDSM actually entails.

Perhaps because the guys that don't like the status quo of porn are held away from it because it became a turn-off?

Your theory is that people stopped purchasing porn because some of it didn't appeal to them?
...
Yeah...no. People really, and I mean really like porn. A lot. A whole lot. They'd buy the porn that did appeal to them in increased amounts, which porn firms would notice, so they'd produce that sort of porn, so that sort of porn would become more common, so that sort of porn would become 'average' long before they stopped purchasing porn.

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

I was not advocating banning it. I don't want to see anything, to the exception of irl kiddiporn, banned.

I just think that it is very weird that the average straight porn work today looks like a BDSM thing (I'm not even complaining how straight porn girl-on-girl is very distant from anything I'd call lesbian). In bed what your average male and female do is clearly different.

It should be something to be curbed to its appropriate domination-submission niche someway. It would make straight porn a lot better for those of us who aren't interested in it, it would be more realistic, it would send those being first exposed to sex or even close relationships by this kind of media better messages.

If it sells then the capitalist way is to make more of what sells. Unfortunately, this is what sells the best of all the pornography out there.

All industries are controlable by the government and people believe it is something correct, that is why when people aren't conservative they generally are centrist, liberal or left-leaning rather than right-wing libertarian.

And sorry if I'm being stupid, but I'd rather see evidence that it is only a mercadological thing and that the industry really needs it.

What if... what we got is an industry trying to appeal more and more of a dessensitized, misogyny-dreaming consumer public, so much that it is losing part of its average and more sensitive male consumers because of its shift to a more 'extreme' focus?

[Aurora Novus]

A small minority of videos depicting submissive women is a specific niche. The vast majority showing such a trend is social commentary. It goes from, t"his is how some women act and how a select few desire them to" to "this is how all women act and how they should be treated".

No, all it means is a lot of people have that sexual interest. You are making unwarranted jumps in logic.

And even if it were true, that a lot of people thought that way, all that is is justification to complain about that specific mindset; not the prevalence of a particular type of pornography.

So you are wholly unjustified in attacking female-sub porn, simply because of it's prevalence.

If you do not believe it applies in this circumstance, let's switch this aspect of pornography with something else. Rape fantasies are a thing, and there is quite a bit of pornography out there that depict it. However, it's clearly just a fantasy for most. It's rather isolated, and many who have them express no desire to act upon them. However, imagine that the vast majority of pornograhy depicted rape. This moves beyond a fetish and enters a horrifying new territory of how an entire industry depicts something. The numbers matter here, and their significance is truly terrifying at times.

If the industry largely depicted rape, all that would me is a lot of people who buy porn have rape fantasies. It speaks nothing about the culture, and again, at best, would only serve as a reason to attack the culture itself; not the prevalence. of porn. You are still making unjustified leaps in logic.

A lot of people liking rape porn isn't a bloody problem. It's not harmful, and therefore deserves no reason to be attacked.

[Tubbsalot]

Go to the 10 main online porn domains (with the appropriate Firefox or Google extensions to ban pop-ups, unwelcomed scripts and all), look the first 30 pages of each of them.

That's a little more effort than I'm willing to go to, but sure, I'll humour you. A brief look at a couple of large sites, sorted by most recent, returns:

- about 10% 'explicitly degrading' results (i.e. female submissive, any type of heterosexual multiple partner sex, fetish content I've arbitrarily considered as degrading to the female)
- about 70% 'two people fucking' results (i.e. one male/one female, without any obvious indication of dominance by one partner)
- about 10% 'softcore female' results (i.e. one female)
- about 10% 'lesbian' results (i.e. multiple females)

Obviously those lesbian results are intended for males, and I'll concede that a lot of those 'two people fucking' results would become degrading on closer examination, but even so, I'm unconvinced that male domination is now the norm for porn.

You will find many things that don't remotely look like what your average female would like to do in a normal day.

Granted. Females are not such a strong audience for porn, and female consumers are apparently willing to accept the current output of porn. The result is a male-centric market. That's not good, certainly, but the issue is that certain types of porn aren't being produced in much quantity. There's no conclusion to be made about the types of porn which are being produced.

Less than 5% of it would make a person with a strong interest in males and male love and male faces and a weaker - though existent - interest in females happy, and even less for those that don't have sexual interest in females at all.

Yes. Homosexuals make up ~5% of the market at most. Again, this a market failure, but it doesn't say anything about the current output of pornography.

It doesn't need to be male-centered and phallus-culting to be interesting, it doesn't need it even for be perverted.

No, but that sells. (Also, "non-perverted" porn is always going to be difficult to obtain. That's just the nature of it.)

[Tubbsalot]

It's not like I use a white noise generator to produce a random sample of porn for myself, so I can't really say whether this is true, but I'm pretty sure there's a *lot* of porn (and a lot of consumers of the same) which does not treat women submissively or in any degrading fashion. Has the distribution changed while I wasn't looking? Is there now no more porn where two people fuck without any surrounding context?

Yes, there is quite a lot of porn that does not treat women submissively or in a degrading fashion, but the overwhelming majority does in fact still appear to treat women in such a manner. Their pleasure is generally depicted as less important, and their role is still for the most part to serve the men present and the audience. The men more or less take what they want and do as they please.

Even if we assume that's the case, that's a result of a male-centric market, not misogyny.

[IshCong]

If it sells then the capitalist way is to make more of what sells. Unfortunately, this is what sells the best of all the pornography out there.

All industries are controlable by the government and people believe it is something correct, that is why when people aren't conservative they generally are centrist, liberal or left-leaning rather than right-wing libertarian.

So, what? We tell people what they can and cannot be sexually aroused by?

And sorry if I'm being stupid, but I'd rather see evidence that it is only a mercadological thing and that the industry really needs it.

What if... what we got is an industry trying to appeal more and more of a dessensitized, misogyny-dreaming consumer public, so much that it is losing part of its average and more sensitive male consumers because of its shift to a more 'extreme' focus?

So, you're saying that the industry's business plan is to undertake a course of action that alienates most of its possible consumers?
Somehow, I don't think that's the case.

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

I'm in-between gay and straight, you know, so I thought it would be clearer for anyone.

Buttsex. Especially to the guy's butt. *blushes*

I'm still pretty sure you're confusing what BDSM actually entails.

Most females I've come across said they were creeped out by buttsex by how buttsex is represented in porn.

And in the way it is marketed, it is really the wrong kind of buttsex that, aside hurting more (and obviously hurting by the way they act), leads to more penile and vaginal infections, problems to the end of the digestive system, and greater rate of HIV/AIDS and other STDs.

Every decent gay knows that you need enema, condom and water-based lubrificant for that. So much that our condomless niche is fetishized as "bareback". In straight porn it is like you can go this way with everyone you see in the street, being 'naturally' ready for it.

Perhaps because the guys that don't like the status quo of porn are held away from it because it became a turn-off?

Your theory is that people stopped purchasing porn because some of it didn't appeal to them?
...
Yeah...no. People really, and I mean really like porn. A lot. A whole lot. They'd buy the porn that did appeal to them in increased amounts, which porn firms would notice, so they'd produce that sort of porn, so that sort of porn would become more common, so that sort of porn would become 'average' long before they stopped purchasing porn.

Only 95% of men masturbate. Ever.

That means that the number of us watching porn is surely around 80% or less.

And those of us watching it weekly or more frequently must be around 50%.

But with the internet, a great percent of those 50% probably don't expend money in it, like me.

So this assertion seems flawed.

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

Yup.

Beyond that, a lot of male Dom/female sub porn goes WAY past "entertaining BDSM dynamic" and into the realm of "jesus christ this is some creepy shit." Speaking as someone who really ought to be in the target market for such porn, I pretty quickly gave up trying to find anything watchable, because a disturbingly large percentage of it seems to be less wank-fuel than nightmare-fuel, less "watch a dude dominate a chick in sexy ways" and more "watch a dude abuse a stupid fucking whore, which is all women are, fuck them all, worthless bitches."

I am glad I am not the only one.

I'd also failed to mention how straight BDSM porn scene is really way more sick than the gay one. I was trying not to be offensive and/or homocentric.

Well, coming from someone who made and enjoys the "sick" straight BDSM porn genre... It's not offensive for you to not like it. I don't like a lot of stuff, I find some things disgusting or sick. I might be into some pretty obscure stuff but everyone's got their opinions lol. As long as you don't condemn those who enjoy it, by all means rock on.

[IshCong]

I'm still pretty sure you're confusing what BDSM actually entails.

Most females I've come across said they were creeped out by buttsex by how buttsex is represented in porn.

And in the way it is marketed, it is really the wrong kind of buttsex that, aside hurting more (and obviously hurting by the way they act), leads to more penile and vaginal, infections, problems to the end of the digestive system, and greater rate of HIV/AIDS.

Every decent gay knows that you need enema, condom and water-based lubrificant for that. So much that our condomless niche is fetishized as "bareback". In straight porn it is like you can go this way with everyone you see in the street, being 'naturally' ready for it.

Anal sex is not BDSM. What are you going on about?

Your theory is that people stopped purchasing porn because some of it didn't appeal to them?
...
Yeah...no. People really, and I mean really like porn. A lot. A whole lot. They'd buy the porn that did appeal to them in increased amounts, which porn firms would notice, so they'd produce that sort of porn, so that sort of porn would become more common, so that sort of porn would become 'average' long before they stopped purchasing porn.

Only 95% of men masturbate. Ever.

"Only". Only ninety-five percent. "Only".

That means that the number of us watching porn is surely around 80% or less.

And those of us watching it weekly or more frequently must be around 50%.

But with the internet, a great percent of those 50% probably don't expend money in it, like me.

So this assertion seems flawed.

Let's assume that your wild assertions here are accurate. That means fifty percent of men watch porn weekly. Your earlier argument suggested that a minority of men were actually interested in what the 'average' porn film was like. If as much as fifty percent of all men are watching porn every week, it's patently obvious one small minority cannot possibly dominate the market in that way unless 'minority' suddenly is the same thing as "almost half of all men". Especially since eighty percent, a huge majority of men, watch and purchase porn and are therefore market influences.

There's simply no way a minority can dominate the market here. The average person is going to dominate by virtue of being average.

Unless the 'flawed assertion' you're referring to is my assertion that people really like porn. In which case half of the male populace viewing porn every week, and eight percent of the male populace viewing porn less often (entirely random and unsupported numbers it seems, but hey, they're yours) is pretty solid evidence that people really like porn.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Only 95% of men masturbate. Ever.

That means that the number of us watching porn is surely around 80% or less.

And those of us watching it weekly or more frequently must be around 50%.

But with the internet, a great percent of those 50% probably don't expend money in it, like me.

So this assertion seems flawed.

"There is no such thing as a free lunch"

By saying that "a great percent of those 50% probably don't expend money in it" you are forgetting that someone is tracking the hits certain videos get, which is why in many pages with collections of porn they also put their "favorite videos" on queue. I would think porn producers also use a similar system to determine the type of porn being produced.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Well, coming from someone who made and enjoys the "sick" straight BDSM porn genre... It's not offensive for you to not like it. I don't like a lot of stuff, I find some things disgusting or sick. I might be into some pretty obscure stuff but everyone's got their opinions lol. As long as you don't condemn those who enjoy it, by all means rock on.

Well, this is a shocker.

I never would have thought you made those kinds of films, much less that you were into that.

Makes me respect you a hell of a lot more for actually coming out and say it.

[IshCong]

Just remembered a certain SaTW comic...and the link it gave. Since several lines of conversation have now come along the question of what sort of porn people watch, it seems relevant.
Link

Feel free to find out what people near you like in porn, and then be haunted forever by that knowledge.

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

All industries are controlable by the government and people believe it is something correct, that is why when people aren't conservative they generally are centrist, liberal or left-leaning rather than right-wing libertarian.

So, what? We tell people what they can and cannot be sexually aroused by?

And sorry if I'm being stupid, but I'd rather see evidence that it is only a mercadological thing and that the industry really needs it.

What if... what we got is an industry trying to appeal more and more of a dessensitized, misogyny-dreaming consumer public, so much that it is losing part of its average and more sensitive male consumers because of its shift to a more 'extreme' focus?

So, you're saying that the industry's business plan is to undertake a course of action that alienates most of its possible consumers?
Somehow, I don't think that's the case.

1 - No. We make a disclaimer that it is extreme and implicitly saying that for those with "great empathy for females" that work seems questionable. So people in websites sort it to extreme sides, even though it is almost wholly user-provided content (to the exception of X...os and X...be, but even those are mostly user-provided), because it becomes common sense in less than 5 years since even men who like porn and sex a lot may be a target to cultural repressions.

It is calling a duck a duck. People are free to fap whatever they feel pleased by.

2 - Do you believe they really think they can target all of the males?

They target mostly those a) lonely b) employed. Reasonably, those lonely tend to be those that are less social toward females. Those employed tend to be in middle and upper classes, with the stereotypical middle and upper class results you may get.

If you mix people who are not poor because poor people are more conservative and rather buy other things, who are mostly white (because it is the USA, and POC tend to get affluent by the time they marry, since they are mostly conservative poor in origin), that don't have girlfriends or wives, what you get? Indeed, people at least with some dark secrets.

[Carnivorous Flying Lunchboxes]

Yeah and I are not problem with it as long it is conscentual.

Dissy, how drunk are you?

And that is pretty much my view on it.

Not as drunk as the autocorrect on my Iphone.

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

Well, coming from someone who made and enjoys the "sick" straight BDSM porn genre... It's not offensive for you to not like it. I don't like a lot of stuff, I find some things disgusting or sick. I might be into some pretty obscure stuff but everyone's got their opinions lol. As long as you don't condemn those who enjoy it, by all means rock on.

Well, this is a shocker.

I never would have thought you made those kinds of films, much less that you were into that.

Makes me respect you a hell of a lot more for actually coming out and say it.

I'm an absolute freak in the sack, yo.
And the things I like porn and erotica wise are even crazier than the stuff I would actually do.

[IshCong]

So, what? We tell people what they can and cannot be sexually aroused by?



So, you're saying that the industry's business plan is to undertake a course of action that alienates most of its possible consumers?
Somehow, I don't think that's the case.

1 - No. We make a disclaimer that it is extreme and implicitly saying that for those with "great empathy for females" that work seems questionable. So people in websites sort it to extreme sides, even though it is almost wholly user-provided content (to the exception of X...os and X...be, but even those are mostly user-provided), because it becomes common sense in less than 5 years since even men who like porn and sex a lot may be a target to cultural repressions.

It is calling a duck a duck. People are free to fap whatever they feel pleased by.

This is just going to reek of subjectivity if implemented. And even if implemented it wouldn't apply to what you seem to have a problem with. By virtue of being 'average' the average isn't the 'extreme' and wouldn't be labelled as such.

2 - Do you believe they really think they can target all of the males?

They target mostly those a) lonely b) employed. Reasonably, those lonely tend to be those that are less social toward females. Those employed tend to be in middle and upper classes, with the stereotypical middle and upper class results you may get.

If you mix people who are not poor because poor people are more conservative and rather buy other things, who are mostly white (because it is the USA, and POC tend to get affluent by the time they marry, since they are mostly conservative poor in origin), that don't have girlfriends or wives, what you get? Indeed, people at least with some dark secrets.

I believe they can target the average consumer and you apparently believe they're capable of targeting whichever sex acts the bulk of eighty percent of the male population most desires. That is not a climate in which a small minority can predominate and have most of the porn produced solely for their niche interests. If 80% of a populace is viewing porn, porn that is attractive to the most people among that 80% will be the most produced and tend towards becoming the 'average'.
It's not like 80% of people are both lonely and employed in any event.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Well, this is a shocker.

I never would have thought you made those kinds of films, much less that you were into that.

Makes me respect you a hell of a lot more for actually coming out and say it.

I'm an absolute freak in the sack, yo.
And the things I like porn and erotica wise are even crazier than the stuff I would actually do.

I've watched all kinds of porn myself, and while I do like a lot of things porn and erotica wise, those things are just the realm of fantasy, doesn't mean that when I get to have sex I'll act on most, or any of them

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

Well, coming from someone who made and enjoys the "sick" straight BDSM porn genre... It's not offensive for you to not like it. I don't like a lot of stuff, I find some things disgusting or sick. I might be into some pretty obscure stuff but everyone's got their opinions lol. As long as you don't condemn those who enjoy it, by all means rock on.

Well, this is a shocker.

I never would have thought you made those kinds of films, much less that you were into that.

Makes me respect you a hell of a lot more for actually coming out and say it.

Same here.

As I said, I think people may fap at and can make sex with everyone but real kids; rape is not sex IMO, so we can take this out of the question anyway.

What consenting people do in bed or any other place is none of my business. Hell, even in the middle of street at daylight. I am never going to whine over their sexuality.

[Tubbsalot]

Just remembered a certain SaTW comic...and the link it gave. Since several lines of conversation have now come along the question of what sort of porn people watch, it seems relevant.
Link

Feel free to find out what people near you like in porn, and then be haunted forever by that knowledge.

Oceania's #8 search is apparently "straight (gay)," beaten only by Nigeria's #3, "things I jack off to."

And the things I like porn and erotica wise are even crazier than the stuff I would actually do.

Probably worth noting, in case anyone isn't aware, that this is the usual case.

[Hetalian Indie Rio de Janeiro]

Well, this is a shocker.

I never would have thought you made those kinds of films, much less that you were into that.

Makes me respect you a hell of a lot more for actually coming out and say it.

I'm an absolute freak in the sack, yo.
And the things I like porn and erotica wise are even crazier than the stuff I would actually do.

I don't know what I would actually do.

Now I am the one going to be brave.

I'm virgin.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Well, this is a shocker.

I never would have thought you made those kinds of films, much less that you were into that.

Makes me respect you a hell of a lot more for actually coming out and say it.

Same here.

As I said, I think people may fap at and can make sex with everyone but real kids; rape is not sex IMO, so we can take this out of the question anyway.

What consenting people do in bed or any other place is none of my business. Hell, even in the middle of street at daylight. I am never going to whine over their sexuality.

1) Rape definitely isn't sex. I mean, it is KINDA sex, because well, it is the physical act of having sex, doesn't mean it is the proper ethical definition of sex.

2) Kiddie porn is wrong. Period.

3) Good! Well, I wouldn't go as far as fo it in the middle of the street at daylight but I get the gist of what you're saying

[Torcularis Septentrionalis]

I'm an absolute freak in the sack, yo.
And the things I like porn and erotica wise are even crazier than the stuff I would actually do.

I've watched all kinds of porn myself, and while I do like a lot of things porn and erotica wise, those things are just the realm of fantasy, doesn't mean that when I get to have sex I'll act on most, or any of them

Well I'm not going to get into the specific things, but in general I like my porn as depraved and vomit-inducing as possible, and containing certain illegal acts (probably not the illegal act you're thinking of). And while I will do some of those things, ie ritualistic cutting, extreme BDSM, and a hell of a lot of role play, I don't go as far as my porn. In fact, for the most part, unless we're really, really feeling it at the time, my sex life is pretty vanilla but with a lot of fantasy. My partner and I are absolutely dominated by our massive fetish for impregnation and pregnancy. I ALMOST agreed to letting him get me pregnant in October, but I finally came to my senses and told him we could do it ASAP after marriage and when we had the money.

And yes, I am very open about my sex life.