If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
The porn debate is as old as pornography, I guess, but mainstream media tends to filter conventional views into its scripts and there are a few reasons for this, namely scriptwriters are writing about characters, so I have to disagree with this post that I came across, about the porn for women reference, and this is the reason why I disagree about the ‘wrongness’, although not vehemently or negatively:
Scriptwriters have to create a character from scratch, and as such, some characters may represent the negative aspects of society such as the bigot, racist, annoying politician, every caricature that we are familiar with. And we all know people who have really strange presumptive ideas, such as those claiming women don’t like porn (even though a significant portion actually do watch and enjoy porn).
As for pornography, I sometimes see it as pornography and don’t make the division between ‘women’s porn’ and ‘men’s porn’. This is more a commercial endeavor, and that’s fair enough. There is nothing wrong with free enterprise, but if pornography was drastically different and gendered, then there’d be more issues with it and as such, this gendered approach may sometimes feature visible differences, that I’m not so sure about. What is porn for women supposed to be? Porn with a little bit more romance and affection? That’s a question for the quiet readers who visit this blog in the daily thousand (yes you. Go on, leave a comment).
In other news, via Open Source Sex, a thought provoking post on funding allocated toward abstinence education. How this benefits health is really surprising. A friend that I have in Australia jokes about American policies, but she has a point but even so, there are no abstinence policies there, but there is a lax approach to sexual health and as a result, there has been an explosion of STI’s – chlamydia being one of the notorious STI’s. The reason for its notoriety is that women often ignore the symptoms because the symptoms are so easy to ignore. There is no painful itch, urinary sting and similar symptoms, so chlamydia carrying men and women may plod along – continue sex – and pass this niggling infection on to other people. As for abstinence? It’s like returning to the era of phrenology; measuring bumps on the head to determine criminality. Abstinence doesn’t really stop STI’s. It doesn’t stop HIV. Abstinence is an attempt, by the previous administration, to maintain a moral order -something I feel is impossible, only because it’s ludicrous to assume that people having sex before marriage are amoral and dangerous to society.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed.Related posts:
