How the woman's body is used. [Mature Topic]

[Desbreko]

[color=#4B0082]I have only one thing to say: [img]http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/7238/boobies3pl.gif[/img]

(Happy now Charles?)[/color]

[Shi no Tenshi]

[quote name='Charles][img']http://img386.imageshack.us/img386/6781/worthless0lv.gif[/img][/quote]

Priceless.

Anyway - intresting topic. I wrote a 16 page essay on this theme, and actually looked at many different points of view. My own opinion? I can't really decide.

On one hand - yes it is degrading to treat women as a sexual object and it can lead to the degeneration of female beauty. It can be tasteless and pointless, and at times disgusting (DO NOT watch farm porn *shudders*)

Yet, on the other hand - it is extremely empowering to women. The majority of men see porn stars as goddesses, even if it's only for their secure sense of sexuality (guess how many times I've used that alliterative sentence!) These women are in control of their bodies with extreme confidence, which is a lot more than a lot of us can say.

On a side note, as a feminist, I believe that men and women should have equality in everything. I say there aren't enough porn magazines for women. More nude men mags please xD

Then there's exploitation within art, the idea of paintings of the Madonna breast feeding being the earliest 'naughty' portraits, desensitization and the degradation of social morals. *le sigh*

On a whole, I don't mind porn. I can watch it, I can read it, and if it's done tastefully (like a lot of them are at Suicide Girls, or in some films) then I can appreciate it and even be turned on by it (which is a plus ;D). But then there's some things that shouldn't exist, such as child pornography, rape porn etc. (the internet is a scary place).

I can write more you know...

[Zidargh]

Jeez, please, the majority of you in this thread, look at what you just said and I bet at least 50% of you will begin to see how hypocritical your statements were. (Basically I agree with what DeadSeraphim said).

Are you trying to tell me that as 12 year old kids you were never tempted to switch the TV over to the Adult Channels in your bedroom after 10 PM to see what all the fuss was about? And after doing so, were you not somewhat curious about it rather than immediately repelled? Or am I wrong in saying that and am lacking the level of morality the majority of you in here follow?

Pornography is here. It has been for over a century. And of course, there is going to be a very strong divide between those that enjoy it, and those that find it disgusting. However, for those that do find it horrifying, and cannot 'see how beautiful women can sell their bodies for such a career'. Well, try and council your next '***** Galore' and I'll be watching the reaction from about 20 miles away.

I strongly believe that for those who, fair enough so, disagree with pornography and criticise these women(You are criticising, you just beat around the bush), you will insult the women you are calling godesses who shouldn't partake in pornography.

It all comes down to the word, [u]choice[/u].

Yes there are well known cases where young women have had no other option but to resort to pornography in order to earn a decent income for their kids. However, for most porn stars (women [b]and[/b] men, or horses), they made the choice to enter the industry.

I mean it's not as if Seymour Butts grabs a porn magazine and shoves it in your face. And pornography sites always have the little [X] button. Just like the the men and women who made the choice to enter the pornography industry, you have the choice to look away.

It's like Rotten.com. I find that site completely horrific and don't quite understand how people can view that on a casual basis, but I understand that there are those who enjoy it.

As someone who has watched pornography before, there are some elements of it which I'm aware of and find absolutely disgusting; Incest, Rape, Paedophilia, etc. However, there are elements of it that I do enjoy. I don't go on bangbros.com to try and have an intimate relationship with the next person who rides in the Bang Bus, nor am I seeking romance. I simply go on there if bored, or very turned on, because some of it is hilarious.

I completely think its fair enough for a lot of you to be disgusted by it, but appreciate that choices were made to enter that industry, and you should respect that.

[haru sakurai]

first off, since when does nudity = porn?

the naked form is a beautiful thing. how is it degrading for a woman (or a man) to be proud of their body and show off their form? just because they don't have their clothes on doesn't make it sexual. if you think it's dirty and sexual, it's your own dirty, sexual mind that's putting that implication there. babies are born naked, is that sick in some way? no, of course not. the only reason people find nudity offensive is because somewhere along the line, some one decided that people are so driven to sin that we can't, say, look at a woman's bare ankle without having thoughts that will send us straight to hell, or if we see the statue of Justice with a bare breast we'll all drop our pants to our ankles and our respective nations will be ground to a standstill as every one in the world can't help but resist the urge to masturbate. these things don't happen because nudity in itself is not sexual. my mother was born in Indonesia and in parts of Indonesia, women wander around without shirts on, not because they would ever have sex with anyone but their husband, but because it's very, very hot and humid in Indonesia and it would be pretty stupid to go around with more clothes than you need. these aren't filthy-minded people. Indonesia has not been reduced to a rampaging orgy in every street. it's all about how you view what you're looking at. just because you are titillated by what you see, doesn't mean it's necessary sexual-- there are people who find looking at pictures of cartoon animals or feet to be quite arousing, but neither subjects on their own are particularly sexual. the only reason we see the naked form, especially the female form, to be overtly sexual is because society has taught us from day one that it is something horrible and forbidden to look at.

you never mentioned if the women in these pictures were actually doing anything that could really be registered as pornographic (ie, performing sexual acts), though i don't find there's anything wrong with porn to those who can seperate it from reality. for you to condemn them for being naked, call it pornography or amoral-- that's much more degrading to them than anything they could manage to achieve by taking their shirts off. you are saying that a woman's form can't be anything [b]but[/b] porn, and that, my friend, is reducing them to a sexual object.

[ShatteredPelvis]

This is insane.

This whole thread is polarizing into some Crazy-Land argument, where one side thinks that women voluntarily removing their clothes is a "moral atrocity", and the other side saying that porn is GREAT and EMPOWERING for women.

Not all porn is empowering for women. Lots of it isn't. Lots of it is called things like [b]"Meat Bucket Guzzles Cum for Cash!!!!"[/b]. It's downright degrading to women as a whole. Now, does that woman have a choice whether or not she stars in that film? Of course! But what kind of social tone is it setting when the standard of sex is set by porn stars? Horrible ones! Real women don't wear platforms to bed, or have their makeup done all the time, have triple-E breasts and enough bleach in theri hair to kill Shamu and [b]nor should they[/b].

On the other hand, the idea that nakedness = pornography is too ridiculous to be taken seriously. If I see a one year old toddler running around without her clothes on, is that porn? No! Seeing another adult naked isn't necessarily about sex, either. The attitude that our only identity without our clothes on is some lust-ridden, animalistic, amoral beast is idiotic. Would you consider the statue of David to be pornography?

Human bodies are beautiful. I admire a horse and say its body is beautiful, and I can admire another human being's body in the same way. Acknowledging that their body is beautiful is not a sexual thing and much art wishes to express that sentiment-- that human beings aren't sinful, aren't ugly. That we're beautiful. What could better say that than a beautiful woman who is comfortable in her own skin?

Let's step out of 1920 here.

[Semjaza]

I wouldn't say the entire thread is like that polarized, but whatever. Again, I think it's important to state that nudity in and of itself isn't pornographic. The statue of David isn't meant to incite sexual arousal by any means and neither is a good majority of nude work of that type. It's a study of form, among other things.

However, when you're stepping into something like Playboy, regardless of whether or not it's showing straight out sexual acts, the point of 99% of their pictorials is to stimulate sexual arousal in their readers (there are some that I've seen that I'd consider more in the realm of art, but I'd feel they're not too common for the publication). That qualifies as pornography by its simple definition.

I can't really tell who is referring to whom in this thread anymore because people are generalizing to the point of "all" people are saying this or that... which really isn't true of what's been stated in each and every post.

[ShatteredPelvis]

Well, what's wrong with pornography in the first place? So what if Playboy arouses sexual feelings? Playboy has quality images, it's no shady business. It's tastefully and artfully done.

There's a big spectrum of pornography, and the dark'n dirty side isn't comparable to the more quality side.

[Shi no Tenshi]

It's difficult to bring art into such an arguement, because as you provided the statue of David as an example, I will provide Egon Schiele, Gustav Klimt and Nobuyoshi Araki as examples.

Egon Schiele has portraits of naked preteens, masturbating girls and many things that if they were in another context would be considered pornographic (even peadophilic). You look at his work and you realise that beyond the mental breakdown ball of angst he is that he does have an extreme amount of talent, his approach to negative space is dazzling.

Gustav Klimt's paintings are equally if not even more stunning. Yet they depict women having orgies! Even better his most famous painting 'The Kiss' has a man and a woman metaphorically making love - but it is the women who is recessive, the man who is dominant (as is suggested in porn).

Nobuyoshi Araki is a card. Don't look him up if you're offended by mere nudity, or even hardcore pornography. He does a lot of bondage, gagging and such yet there are messages in his work, many of them empowering women and portraying them as dominatrixes or potraying the aftermath of rape victims. I cringe about the gargantuan sizes they blow his prints up to (especially as there are usually a number of spread legs) but I can also appreciate the artistic side (at least).

Funny thing is his models say they feel 'fulfilled' once they have their photo taken by this man. And oh yeah, he's banned in Japan (I wonder why). How is it different to porn though? I think it's merely in the context it's been put into.

I find this very relevant to the topic, so feel free to discuss ;p

[Annie]

[quote name='Generic NPC #3']..Again, I think it's important to state that nudity in and of itself isn't pornographic...[/quote]


[size=1]That's what I attempted to say, but made it too complicated--as per my usual.

What's wrong with pornography? Well, I touched on it in my first lame post, but that isn't the only reason why I don't care for pornographic films/magazines. To be perfectly honest, it doesn't arouse me or excite me in any way--so, what purpose does it serve to me? And besides, if something [i][b]did[/i][/b] happen to catch my fancy, it's a tease to me--and I don't like being teased >_>
[/size]

[DBZgirl88]

[COLOR=#004a6f]The human body, whether male or female, is beautiful, but it is not something that should be displayed for everyone to see. People should only share their bodies with their lovers.

If you had something precious, would you not hide it somewhere safe, and gaurd it?

I know people who choose to pose for pornography and nude photos are simply exercising their "rights" but do honestly think it's the right for those individuals?

Anyway, although I am personally disgusted by porn, I do accept the fact that it is serving its puropse of sexual arousal.

What bothers me more sometimes is how women's bodies are used to sell products. In this day, one just takes a product, slaps on a women's naked body, and there you go, you have an ad!

This may make sense for body lotions and soaps, but I've seen it done with toilet paper. [B]Toilet paper[/B] for God's sake. Honestly, is it so neccesary to have such racy ads. I can't look through one magazine without coming across an ad that uses a woman's body. Pretty sad.[/COLOR]

[Semjaza]

[QUOTE=ShatteredPelvis]Well, what's wrong with pornography in the first place? So what if Playboy arouses sexual feelings? Playboy has quality images, it's no shady business. It's tastefully and artfully done.

There's a big spectrum of pornography, and the dark'n dirty side isn't comparable to the more quality side.[/QUOTE]

I don't remember saying there was anything wrong with it to begin with, although I think there's a strong difference between "tasteful" and "artistic". The posts directly above me were claiming that Playboy's work isn't "pornography" and is simply "nudes", which isn't really true... so I said something against it. In general, I was just stating that 1.) Playboy, for example, falls into pornography by default, but 2.) most people see that word and automatically associate it with distasteful, shoddy things and 3.) by extention, anything utilizing nudes has been demonized by such people. I'm not trying to give the idea that I do the latter or agree with it at all, because I don't.

[ShatteredPelvis]

Wait... you jumped from "bodies are beautiful" to "you should only display your body to your love". That doesn't make much sense.

Bodies are not like chocolate bars. If I put a delicious chocolate bar out on display and people enjoy it, soon the chocolate is all gone. So obviously I would only want to share my wonderful chocolate with a few close friends or maybe no one at all! But if someone has a beautiful body and people admire it... the body isn't gone. Nothing has been taken. That person still has their beauty, and the admirers have gotten to enjoy something, too.

It's precious, but that's no reason to hide it away.

Now, I'm not advocating people walking around naked. There is a time and a place for nudity, and I agree taht toilet paper ads probably aren't the best time or place.

But there's nothing wrong with showing off your body, especially since many cultures worldwide do it and they aren't sinful. Like Haru said up thre, in South East Asia women walk around with no shirts all the time. It's not for crazy giant orgies. It's for the heat.

If you think that bodies are so precious that they can't be displayed, which parts of the body are you talking about? Would you consider a photo of a woman's eyes just as immoral as a photo pf her breasts? After all, they're both beautiful, so they should both be hidden away, right? :rolleyes:

[DBZgirl88]

[COLOR=#004a6f][QUOTE]If you think that bodies are so precious that they can't be displayed, which parts of the body are you talking about? Would you consider a photo of a woman's eyes just as immoral as a photo pf her breasts? After all, they're both beautiful, so they should both be hidden away, right?[/QUOTE]Okay, I mean your private areas.[/COLOR]

[Retribution]

[size=1]Advertisers use a woman's body because it is found naturally attractive by about half the population. These advertisements also heavily play to human nature -- the desire to procreate being one of them -- and so we naturally will pay more attention to a racy ad. I think there should certainly be a line not to be crossed as far as the media and its advertising goes, but I don't think modern media has hit that point. I really don't feel alarmed when I watch televion... but perhaps I'm just desensitised to it all.

If you have something precious, why not share it? What good is a treasure if it's locked up? Granted, I don't really think people should be having orgies in the streets, but pornography (to me) seems acceptable most of the time.[/size]

[OMNOMNOMALY]

[QUOTE=Goddess][size=1]
What's wrong with pornography? Well, I touched on it in my first lame post, but that isn't the only reason why I don't care for pornographic films/magazines. To be perfectly honest, it doesn't arouse me or excite me in any way--so, what purpose does it serve to me? And besides, if something [i][b]did[/i][/b] happen to catch my fancy, it's a tease to me--and I don't like being teased >_>
[/size][/QUOTE]

[COLOR=DarkSlateBlue][FONT=Trebuchet MS]I agree. I would never lie and say I've never seen porn, but what I have seen has just been a neutral thing. I'm just not a fan of pornography.

I just want to clarify that just because I don't agree with porn, or look at it myself, it doesn't mean I look down on those who participate in being in/looking at it. I might not understand it, but I would never go out and tell some woman who had been in some distasteful nude pictures that she was an awful person, and so was anybody who bought the magazine she was in.

[Sorry, I know it may be a little late to clarify that >>;;][/FONT][/COLOR]

[ForgottenRaider]

I thank those in this thread that have some sense and are speaking for the common people...It was starting to make me sick reading all of the self righteous 12-15 year old opinions of why porn is the devil because their mothers told them it was.

Look people it is as simple as every one jerks off reasonably often (unless they are in a realationship where they are getting it often) and after awhile just looking at a clothed female or males doesn't do it so people tend to look for more. This is where mags come in, pictures, movies, the internet, and more perverted stuff. If you aren't one of these people and you are over 18 you are part of a vocal minority (often religious based) and it is you with the social problem...The rest of society just continues quietly and laughs with the knowledge that you'll have crap sex with the lights off for the rest of your life. And let me be specific this applies to males and females almost equally - as it happens the only user at work today to look at porn on the web was a female (who btw was warned as per our AUP).

And two naked females? Common, I have an email sitting in a cache at work with two females doing 'interesting' things with double fists that got caught in a mail filter a month ago from one of the most respected and influential persons in this city - That I would class as degrading to females though I have reasonably high moral standards.

Every adult looks at porn and enjoys it and if you don't you are broken socially, mentally, or physically (not that that is a problem?). That is if we are being mature about this topic anyway - and blunt.

Move along and get on with your life. (And don't search for your porn at school or work; your sys admins are watching!)

[Annie]

[quote name='ForgottenRaider']and if you don't you are broken socially, mentally, or physically (not that that is a problem?). That is if we are being mature about this topic anyway - and blunt. [/quote]


[size=1]Though I can't speak for everyone else, I'll say that I can't get angry at you for that. I actually want to thank you for saying that. Why? Because it's absolutely true. My social life, what social life? I don't have one, I work 2 jobs and don't have any friends because I'm too stuborn and am rumored to be a *****. It's the god's honest truth; and it doesn't bother me. My entire teenage life consisted of being alone, so you kind of get used to it.

Broken down mentally? Sure! I can't go into the details of my agreement (well, I'd rather not), but I'll admit that I can be somewhat unstable. My attitude runs hot and cold, and sometimes I can't even figure myself out.

Physicall not fulfilled, heh. 'nuff said.

But, I'm perfectly content with who I am. I don't need to enjoy pornography to enjoy my life. Sure, I'm not exactly happy with where I'm at at the moment, but I don't [i]need[/i] pornography to enjoy myself and my body, or others around me. Now, I know you weren't intending to focus on one specific person. I'm just being honest and blunt on how I viewed that statement. I'll say this now, I don't mean for this post to come off as if I'm retorting back, or spitting it back. I really don't. I'm in no way mad or upset. So, please don't take offense (if any :P ). [/size]

:bdance:

[Panache]

[QUOTE=Citrus][SIZE=1]I am particularly upset right now. I was having a nice AIM chat with a friend and doing some internet surfing, a hobby of mine. Of course I wanted to check out a few Xanga sites because I like reading about other people's days and what not. But what I was about to find was just going to make me mad.

I went to this one site that seemed normal enough, until I hit the next page. He had two picures of these women naked, otherwise known as porn. I don't know if he had more but I exited that page and was outraged.

Now the woman body is half the time a sex symbol. It makes me mad because these young woman have so much beauty, but they express is in the most inappropriate way.

I just don't understand why woman choose to do this, when they have the capability of being something better.

What's your opinion on pornography? I would really like to know.[/SIZE][/QUOTE]


A womans body can be used however the woman wants it to be used. Maybe the women were living in extreme poverty and neded the money and they did'nt want to be strippers and demean themselves more. If you have such a big problem with what they do with their bodies why dont you contact them and tell them of your outrage. I cannot beleive you are making money to feed your family by any means nessesary. It is simply outrageous that your children require food and water to live.

BTW This person will say **** you you rich snobby *****. Maybe the girl just likes it. Maybe she likes giving men who like porn pleasure. Either way its non of your buiseness anyway. If you have a problem with pornography as a whole then you can sue the company and look very foolish just like the others who take on this industry.

[ForgottenRaider]

[QUOTE=Goddess][size=1]So, please don't take offense (if any :P ). [/size]

:bdance:[/QUOTE]
Mmm none at all. What I said was a sweeping generalisation which doesn't even apply to me well though covers everything reasonably effectively.

[eleanor]

[color=darkslateblue] Sometimes I get irked when other girls will point at some Victoria's Secret model and shriek about how society is dying and stuff. I like to think of a woman's beauty as something she should be proud of, and not to be amish-like and refuse to wear bikinis because it's the end of moral thinking. Of course, I'm pretty sure that I know the line between being sexy and being skanky.

I think we should except that sometimes people get horny and they watch porn. Do I think women who choose to be a part in pornography/stripping/whatever are letting their bodies be used? It really depends on the situtation. This is hardly a matter than you can generalize, because you honestly do not know what these people are really thinking.

What's disgusting in how a woman's body is used is when they are forced to reveal their bodies in a manner that they don't want to, and I think it's as simple as that. [/color]

[renayiiq]

I totally agree with ForgottenRaider.
Yeah I know, I'm 16. I watch porn on occasion, like once ever 3-6 months. I don't find anything wrong with it.
To be honest, when I turn 18, I'd love to model for SuicideGirls. But I'm afraid that, because of my weight, I can't. I'm not fat, but I don't have a particularly good-looking body, either.

And to the person that said that the human body is precious and should be locked away -- Why shouldn't I share my precious (well, not so precious, but still) body with others? Why shouldn't I embrace it and let others see my (opposite of this next word) beauty? And hey, aren't you the Muslim guy that posted in the homosexuality thread? No wonder you don't like nudity. No offense, but it seems just too typical that you don't like nudity, considering your religion.

[Raiyuu]

[color=DarkGreen][font=Trebuchet MS]This thread has been mercifully civil so far, so let's cut out things like this:
[quote name='Avenged666fold][/font][/color]**** you you rich snobby *****[color=DarkGreen'][font=Trebuchet MS][/quote] Censored or not, I'd like to remind you, Avenged666fold, that personal attacks on other members are considered seriously on OB. Your post seemed kind of muddled, so I don't know whether you meant it as a hypothetical "some people would say this" or as your own response to Citrus, but either way there's no need for hurtful language.

Let's keep the thread going the way it started.
[/font][/color]

[Fyxe]

[size=1][color=slategray]You know what porn really is? Those BOD men commercials.

I actually think that this whole thing about porn is ridiculous. I mean, we're just animals, and if you look at it... every other animal walks around nude. they just have more fur than us. Clothes were only made for warmth. What if humans had never been smart enough to wear other materials to keep us from the cold? We'd all be nude. And we wouldn't find it one bit degrading.

Let's face it, women are the more beautiful gender, and if women believe that they hold that beauty, then by all means, let them us it. Porn is nothing to be ashamed of. It's natural for people to get aroused when looking at it, and it's natural for people to want to show off their stuff.

I only find it wrong when children are being used. Normally they don't know what's going on, or they've been trafficked. Human Trafficking and child pornography are just wrong. These are the people that don't have a choice, that are being blackmailed, being treated like dirt.

Otherwise, when women, even men, take part in porn on their own free will, then what's the problem?[/color][/size]

[Retribution]

[QUOTE=Lix][size=1][color=slategray]What if humans had never been smart enough to wear other materials to keep us from the cold? We'd all be nude. And we wouldn't find it one bit degrading.
[/color][/size][/QUOTE]
[size=1]We would all be living at the equator had clothes not been invented. We also lost our fur because of evolution ... I'm guessing because we didn't need it for some reason or another. I'll take the clothes and the degrading nudity with it.

But I agree with you ... women are more beautiful than men overall.[/size]

[Annie]

[QUOTE=renayiiq]
To be honest, when I turn 18, I'd love to model for SuicideGirls. But I'm afraid that, because of my weight, I can't. I'm not fat, but I don't have a particularly good-looking body, either.
[/QUOTE]

[size=1]Not to stray off topic too far, but hun, you're still young. You have a couple of years until you're 18. If you'd really like to be a model, then start working on making it happen now! And besides, I'm sure that SuicideGirls does take girls of all body shapes and sizes. But, if you really want to have that toned body, start now while you're young. You don't need to be a stick figure to be a model--unless you're a runway model, then you'd need to miraculously grow a foot in height O_O

I've seen a picture of you, and you are cute! So don't even argue with me :p [/size]