<div dir="ltr">seriously? because for men sex is purely physical right? Thanks for telling me how I experience sex, I had no idea.<br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Sonja Trauss <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sonja.trauss@gmail.com" target="_blank">sonja.trauss@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div>mmm according to conservative readings of the bible, all non-reproductive sex is sinful. masturbating and pulling out are both sins, and in that way equivalent. So if you want to throw around the 'puritanical' label, it would have to stick to the idea that masturbation and sex are interchangeable, and not the idea they they are two pretty different types of activities. <br>
<br></div>Other women should pipe up here, but the only people who have ever tried to tell me that "masturbation is a type of sex" have been men. No, masturbation is not sex. In the same way that vitamin pills are not food. Masturbation is a thing too thoroughly inferior to sex to be classed with it. I guess, from a male pleasure point of view, they are equivalent, if you cum from sex or you cum from jerking off, you cum, who cares, but they are not equivalent from your gf's pov. I would 1000% prefer my partner to cum from fucking me than from jerking off. I get nothing out of him jerking off, if he fucks me I will almost surely cum. <br>
<br></div>The idea that we should make more porn (for women!) has always struck me as an example of men thinking women should be more like men. Maybe women aren't that into porn, not because there's not that much porn that women like, but because porn is lame and boring. Maybe instead of women going against their natures and learning to enjoy passively watching other people have sex, men should go against their natures and learn to enjoy closing the laptop, picking up the phone, waiting 15 minutes for your girl to come over, and then fucking her. <br>
</div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 1:58 AM, GtwoG PublicOhOne <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:g2g-public01@att.net" target="_blank">g2g-public01@att.net</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
Sonja, Andrew, and Yo's-<br>
<br>
Whoa there! All this about "masturbation replacing sex" reinforces
an artificial duality that's ultimately founded in puritanism, in
which masturbation may not be "sinful" but it's "not real sex."<br>
<br>
To paraphrase an old Campbell's Soup ad, "It's Sex for One and that
one is you!"<br>
<br>
What I personally find bizarre as hell, is the degree to which our
culture is so couple-normative, and the degree to which sexual
coupling is normalized and expected as the primary axis on which
lifetime relationships are based. This when there's a near-infinite
range of potential upon which humans could base their relationships.<br>
<br>
Have you ever seen a couple that appeared to you to be either
overtly dysfunctional or just plain weird in the manner of "what the
hell could s/he possibly see in him/her?!" The answer usually turns
out to be "in bed," as in: they may be totally incompatible in all
other ways, but they have some unique kink in common, or just screw
like mad weasels, and apparently that's enough to keep them
together. <br>
<br>
Under all of this is the genetic competition algorithm, that dates
back to bacteria but seems remarkably incapable of producing humans
with the intelligence needed to overcome war, climate change, and
all the other forces of our own making that threaten our
near-extinction. In an era where "the cybernetically-enhanced
human" is a common cultural meme, surely we can do better! <br>
<br>
Anyone who thinks that their precious genes are something special
(or that there is any such thing as a superior race), is in for a
rude awakening: we share well over 99% of our genome with
chimpanzees and bonobos. Selfish genes helped us get from our birth
as a species to the point where our survival was assured. Since
that time we have overpopulated and overconsumed the planet,
threatening our own continued existence within our lifetimes. <br>
<br>
It's time to move beyond obedience to algorithms that no longer
serve us. <br>
<br>
-G.<br>
<br>
<br>
======<div><div><br>
<br>
<br>
<div>On 13-05-05-Sun 1:22 AM, Sonja Trauss
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<p>That study says nothing about whether masturbation does or
doesn't replace sex. It says that teens who masturbate more have
more sex, which makes perfect sense. These are things that you
expect to see together, like umbrellas and rubber boots, but you
would never say that the umbrella caused the boots, or vice
versa. And this study says nothing about whether sex causes
masturbation or the other way around.<br>
It also doesn't say anything about masturbation with or without
porn (although I wish it did). <br>
Masturbation is all well and good, of course, but that's not
sufficient to explain why porn is well and good. <br>
I'm super curious. I can't experimentally not watch porn and see
what happens because I already don't, but if any of you do, then
you will be able to tell me what you would be missing. </p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On May 5, 2013 12:43 AM, "Andrew" <<a href="mailto:andrew@roshambomedia.com" target="_blank">andrew@roshambomedia.com</a>>
wrote:<br type="attribution">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>Sonja,<br>
<br>
</div>
I disagree with your views on masturbation. For one, I
don't think that masturbation causes people to have less
sex. Here's a study a found by googling I'm sure there is
more data to back up the fact that masturbation does not
reduce the amount of sex someone is having.<br>
<br>
<a href="http://health.usnews.com/health-news/family-health/womens-health/articles/2011/08/01/study-tracks-masturbation-trends-among-us-teens" target="_blank">http://health.usnews.com/health-news/family-health/womens-health/articles/2011/08/01/study-tracks-masturbation-trends-among-us-teens</a><br>
<br>
It is also just, in general a healthy practice.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>second, I can masturbate without porn, and with porn
(as can most people).<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>I really believe that part of being sex positive is
also being accepting of masturbation as natural and
healthy.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>--Andrew<br>
</div>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 12:25 AM,
Sonja Trauss <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sonja.trauss@gmail.com" target="_blank">sonja.trauss@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<p>Yeah .... so what if you didn't have anything, and
you couldn't concentrate. Would you give up? Maybe the
first day. Maybe even the 2nd day, but eventually you
would be able to masterbate on your own I bet.</p>
<p>I'm a girl and never encountered very much porn I
liked at all. I *guess* a solution could be to make
porn a girl would like, but my solution was to have
sex instead, which has been overall great. It's forced
me to get in contact, and stay in contact, with people
I otherwise wouldn't have. Making porn that girls
like, so they can join men in having an activity that
allows them to have less sex, seems antisocial and a
step backwards. <br>
Yeah the more I think about this the more absurd it
seems that a crowd that is interested in expanding the
audience for porn would overlap with a 'do-acracy'
hackerspace crowd. Watching porn is watching, not
doing.</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>On May 4, 2013 7:53 PM, "Andrew" <<a href="mailto:andrew@roshambomedia.com" target="_blank">andrew@roshambomedia.com</a>>
wrote:<br type="attribution">
</div>
<div>
<div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<p>People want porn for somthing easy to focus
on while masturbating. Masturbating being a
natural part of life. I also dont think that
all people who can have sex with others, but
don't , are doing so because they don't have
the "skills"</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On May 4, 2013 7:20 PM,
"Sonja Trauss" <<a href="mailto:sonja.trauss@gmail.com" target="_blank">sonja.trauss@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br type="attribution">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<p>Or less representation of sex altogether.
What does anyone need porn for?</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On May 4, 2013 7:10
PM, "Andrew" <<a href="mailto:andrew@vagabondballroom.com" target="_blank">andrew@vagabondballroom.com</a>>
wrote:<br type="attribution">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<p>When i ran an erotic event in oakland
our crew made it a point to balence
genders as much as possible. We had
male and female co-hosts and male and
female strippers.</p>
<p>Also. Somthing to keep in mind is
that there are more than two genders.
In my mind objectification is not the
issue. Representation is. Porn is
mostly filmed from a hetero-cis-male
perspective and because of that, taken
as a whole, is exploitive. There is
porn that fights this perspective and
representation of sex and there needs
to be more.</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On May 4, 2013
6:55 PM, "Sonja Trauss" <<a href="mailto:sonja.trauss@gmail.com" target="_blank">sonja.trauss@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br type="attribution">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<p>Can I get a link for this
gonorreah story?</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On May 4,
2013 6:42 PM, "GtwoG PublicOhOne"
<<a href="mailto:g2g-public01@att.net" target="_blank">g2g-public01@att.net</a>>
wrote:<br type="attribution">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Romy & Yo's-<br>
<br>
Re. "womens' bodies with their
faces cut off."<br>
<br>
Wow. Thanks for pointing that
out. I never noticed that
before (OTOH<br>
attempts to do "sexy" in
advertising generally don't get
my attention),<br>
but I vaguely recall seeing ads
like that somewhere.<br>
<br>
I agree, a torso minus a face is
depersonalizing and objectifying
as<br>
hell, unless there's a very good
reason for taking a photo that
way<br>
(e.g. medical contexts). Being
looked at "that way" produces
the creepy<br>
feeling that the looker's
intentions are non-consensual.<br>
<br>
The only borderline-legit reason
I could see for doing it in
clothing<br>
ads is, "we want you to imagine
yourself wearing this, and we
don't want<br>
to risk putting you off by
showing a face that's
substantially different<br>
to yours, so imagine your face
on this person's body." But it
would be<br>
foolish to think that's what's
intended every time that
photographic<br>
method is used.<br>
<br>
This brings up the question of
what people find sexy in
photography.<br>
For me (gay male), a photo minus
a face is a non-starter: there's
no cue<br>
for communication with the
person. Nudes in general don't
do it either:<br>
all the usual contextual cues as
to someone's personality are
missing,<br>
so why would I even begin to
imagine being in an intimate
context with<br>
someone I don't really know?
I've always felt that way but
now we have<br>
the HIV pandemic to reinforce
it: in general it's not a good
idea to get<br>
intimate with someone you don't
know very well, because the
outcome<br>
could be a life-threatening
illness.<br>
<br>
For that matter, now that
massively-drug-resistant
gonorrhea is loose in<br>
the USA, which is hella' easier
to catch than HIV and can kill
you in a<br>
matter of days through a raging
bacterial infection, it's
probably a<br>
darn good idea for everyone to
"get smart & play safe" ALL
the time,<br>
zero exceptions, even more so
than with HIV. In which case
photography<br>
that portrays an objectified
sexuality without communications
isn't just<br>
gross and exploitative, it's a
public health hazard that
reinforces<br>
attitudes that put people at
risk for their lives.<br>
<br>
-G.<br>
<br>
<br>
=====<br>
<br>
<br>
On 13-05-04-Sat 10:34 AM, Romy
Snowyla wrote:<br>
> It's interesting to me how
porn a<br>
> Nd erotica always advertise
with women's bodies with their
faces cut off<br>
> American apparel digs this
etc<br>
> Lots of art theory
discusses this<br>
><br>
> I would love for any Sudo
room event to break the mold and
show men's bodies in any erotic
theme as well ... Also would
love to see the male body as the
focus of any erotic film or
dance to balance out the
Imbalance and unnatural
obsession with t and a we see on
the porn industry<br>
><br>
> Sent from my iPad<br>
>
_______________________________________________<br>
> sudo-discuss mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org" target="_blank">sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss</a><br>
><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
sudo-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org" target="_blank">sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
sudo-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org" target="_blank">sudo-discuss@lists.sudoroom.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss" target="_blank">http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
-- <br>
-------
<div>Andrew Lowe</div>
<div>Cell: <a href="tel:831-332-2507" value="+18313322507" target="_blank">831-332-2507</a></div>
<div><a href="http://roshambomedia.com" target="_blank">http://roshambomedia.com</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>-------<div>Andrew Lowe</div><div>Cell: 831-332-2507</div><div><a href="http://roshambomedia.com" target="_blank">http://roshambomedia.com</a></div><div><br></div>
</div>