"Ginx “I will never be persuaded that pornography has NO influence on the subsequent treatment of women “

That is for you to prove and not to be presumed as fact."
____________________

See;-that's the thing TB; response is one thing, 'tis a forum after all. But THAT little one liner was NOT warranted and not appreciated.

...........just pointing out to you that YOU initiated the putdown. Thought I'd mention that, because being who WE are TB, it appears we are up for the long haul. So be it.

OK:-

1) Twit is spelled with only the one T.

2) I..er, DID know you were not the one 'who drives trucks or accepts lifts in them'...( I never thought of you as being a bit of a dimwit;-you cover it up really well,..but occasionally...).

3) So Ducky rhymes with Truckie hey? Well golly gosh! and gee whiz! TB, aren't you clever!!

4) Ummmm;-..er, certainly not the TYPE for you (!.!.!.!.!),-that's for sure; but not the right gender eh? OKKKKKKKKKK......

So many things you have posted now make more sense. I confess to being somewhat bemused by your rather effeminate and decidedly uxorious affection for Madge. NOW I understand.
______________________________________________________

"I believe you on that regard but then we don't get to bothered by other things which might distress a partner to be asked to emulate.

Lifestyle programs and womens mags featuring expensive houses, furniture and holidays is one that springs to mind. How many marriages have been wrecked by one party always wanting more and creating pressure (emotional and or financial) in pursuit of it." (Quote:R0bert)

I just noticed this, R0bert. Are you serious? This is a comparison to being asked to say;- copulate with a dog?

What??

Ginx “But THAT little one liner was NOT warranted and not appreciated.”

Oh, the delicate little petals are bruised.

Phone Beyond Blue or someone who actually cares

Ginx, "This is a comparison to being asked to say;- copulate with a dog?"

No I'd not thought along that lines. I think that's illegal but I'm not sure where watching porn about it fits into the legal spectrum.

I was thinking in terms a lot closer to the norm. About being more adventurous within existing sexual orientation.

As with any stance against further government control there are extremes which don't fit well. To me it seems a bit like the anti-abortion crowd refering to women using abortion because they couldn't be bothered with contraception, there may be cases like that but they don't represent the norm or the bulk of those impacted if the case for greater loss of freedom is won.

Don't tell me the sources but how often have you had different women tell you of requests which were that extreme? I'd hope that it's rare.

If the debate was just about limiting access to pornographic material depicting illegal acts I'd not be overly interested (although the point made about Japanese porn and sexual assault rates is relevant).

Whilst you are ambivalent about censorship many of those attacking porn think they have the right to try and control what others do with their bodies. The right to impose their interpretations of their chosen gods views on those who don't hold a belief in their god.

Others why cry foul at men commenting on abortion because "it's my body my choice" and then advocate for the imposition of censorship on what men choose to do with their bodies.

R0bert

I am not anti-porn, however I am concerned at the way women are portrayed in MOST porn.

Spot the hypocrisy:

The hetero male contingent on OLO claim that porn is all harmless fun. That the images of women portrayed as basic objects for men, is not at all harmful, actually reduces the incidence of rape, and does not reinforce sexual stereotypes at all. Besides the women are consenting adults aren’t they?

In the highly lucrative world of advertising, stereotyping is common as it panders to our needs, desires and fantasies to sell everything from chocolates to cars. I recall R0bert on many occasions complaining about the portrayal of men as buffoons as being detrimental to male well-being. And he is not alone. There is a plethora of research of the impact of stereotyping of both men and women in advertising. Many men are not happy about these images.

But it sells. Advertising works. Whether we admit it or not advertising feeds both our conscious and sub-conscious desires.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/09/18/1063625153160.html

“John Marsden, the best-selling adolescents' fiction writer, and author of the non-fiction books Secret Men's Business and The Boy You Brought Home, said, "Teenage boys are among the most maligned group in our society ...
"The media portrays them as either drug-crazed, illiterate, unemployable, suicidal, failures at school, sex criminals or vandals. So adults tend to treat them more suspiciously, and that causes them [unconsciously] to become angry or frustrated or alienated."
The Advertising Standards Bureau, one of the few organisations that measures complaints about stereotypes in the media, reports a steady increase in the percentage of men (now more than a third) complaining about advertising, and their most frequent complaint is about sexual discrimination.”

If the way we portray men and women in advertising can be harmful – why would porn displaying rape scenes, gang bangs or any other demeaning sex act be any different? It is not about consent; it is about the limited view of sexuality that hetero male preferences are the norm and therefore acceptable no matter how demeaning this limited sexuality is to women.

Fractelle, "The hetero male contingent on OLO claim that porn is all harmless fun." - I've not noticed anybody saying that it's all harmless fun. That's a strawman claim to allow you to rebut what you would like others to believe we are saying. I expected better from you on that.

I am saying that the evidence appears to be that increased access to porn has reduced the incidence of sexual assault. Stats based claims rather than emotive impressions and I've provided a link to the material as has Col to a study from a different part of the world.

The Porn Book discussed elsewhere has rebutted the assumtion that the bulk of porn shows women "as basic objects for men"

The more extreme porn does reinforce stereotypes and mindsets which I don't like but so does almost every magazine in the waiting room of my doctors surgery and near the checkout's at Woolies let alone much of what's on prime time TV slots.

TurnRightThenLeft posted a piece recently that says better than I can say it my views on trying to force others to a particular way of thinking.

Research is showing that mainstream porn is not as portrayed all to often by the anti-porn crowd and the statistical evidence is showing a clear correlation between improved access to porn and reduced rates of sexual assaults.

I don't like the portrayal of violence against men as acceptable in advertising. My choice is to avoid the products of those companies who use that advertising slant.

I've never much liked abortion but have accepted that women should have control over what they do with their own bodies regardless of my own misgivings. That the dangers to society of not accepting that freedom far outweigh my concerns.

Why is it that so many women appear to be unwilling to accept that men and some other women should also have control over what they do with their bodies?

R0bert

TB; It's OK dear. I understand.
________________________

R0bert; I need to search out some data, and refer to a third party. I'll get back to you.