Leave a comment

Comments 22

valkyriekaren March 16 2010, 09:39:47 UTC
Links broken?

Reply

serpentstar March 16 2010, 09:51:40 UTC
Yes -- will sort now -- thanks for spotting that. Cursed LJ!

Reply

serpentstar March 16 2010, 09:55:47 UTC
Works for me now -- dunno quite what was up, other than LJ's wonkiness, but I disabled Rich Text, deleted a load of random LJ-ish HTML, resaved, and seem to have sorted it.

Reply

greylock March 16 2010, 10:16:28 UTC
Workin' for me. (The first one is, perhaps not surprisingly NFSW, but given the URL is scrambled by Ow.ly, and could easily be a thought piece from The Guardian you might want to warn unsuspecting viewers.

Reply


valkyriekaren March 16 2010, 10:19:34 UTC
Hmm.

The pro-porn article doesn't say anything about it improving one's own body image or self-esteem, though - just that it made people more positive in their interactions with others.

Reply

serpentstar March 16 2010, 10:27:27 UTC
Yeah -- I don't think it'd necessarily, inherently improve body image or self-esteem, though IMO porn does provide something of an antidote to the airbrushed, idealised, uber-skinny young women seen in the mass media, in that it presents women of a variety of shapes, sizes, & ages.

Reply

valkyriekaren March 16 2010, 10:31:31 UTC
It may not be celeb-airbrushed or catwalk-skinny, but I'm not convinced that surgically-enhanced and full-body-waxed is better.

Reply

serpentstar March 16 2010, 10:35:05 UTC
Me neither, although it is *different*, and tends to emphasise (at least) a more feminine, voluptuous shape. Plus, again, there's greater variety in porn -- or maybe it depends on what porn one looks at.

Reply


_grimtales_ March 16 2010, 11:36:11 UTC
IMO the second article is already pretty much describing reality especially with the rise of the whole metrosexual thing. Men are either represented in advertising as these perfect adonai or as bumbling fools.

Reply

serpentstar March 16 2010, 14:22:39 UTC
I don't think it's anything like that bad, yet, for men.

Reply


phyrbyrd March 16 2010, 13:52:47 UTC
Yeah, the thing about mainstream porn is that it's all for men. There isn't any for women out there. There's a few that purport to be for women but they're generally much softer core and about thirty years out of date in the type of men depicted. Generally they only show the musclebound Chippendale type and I don't know ANYBODY who ACTUALLY finds that attractive.

Reply

50_ft_queenie March 16 2010, 15:22:47 UTC
That's why I love the Feminist Porn Awards: http://www.goodforher.com/feminist_porn_awards

Reply

the_siobhan March 16 2010, 15:51:34 UTC
Damn. This is my first time hearing of this event, and wouldn't you know it's on the exact date of my surgery?

Reply

50_ft_queenie March 16 2010, 16:06:57 UTC
Porn or surgery? Porn or surgery? Tough call. ;)

I've been to the FPAs twice and they're damn good fun. Picked up some tasty dyke porn too. If I'd known you didn't know about them, I would have dragged you along. They used to be held at the Gladstone, but the last time the room was so packed that there was barely even standing room.

Reply


I disagree - plus it depends on your definition of hard core porn. snesgirl March 16 2010, 15:06:43 UTC
I'll come back and comment more later on once I have a laptop battery filled with powah....

Reply


Leave a comment

Up