egafd.com

Alex wrote:

>
> And if your girlfriends fantasy involves rough sex? She has to
> be frustrated her entire life because you think her fantasy is
> the same thing as paedophilia? Come on. Girls arn't all like
> Mary Whitehouse. They have fantasies just like men.
>
No, you're taking this out of context, once again. This isn't about fantasy play-acting; the thread was about violence (not faked, like in a mainstream movie) being used more and more in porno productions . . . and it was about the adverse effect this might have (in the way of de-sensitization) on its audience. It's about SADISM in pornography that's being talked about.

I happen to know my wife very well, and I can assure you that if I ever raised my hand to her she'd be out the front door in flash. I guess she's just a normal, well-adjusted woman.

You keep carping on about girls having these fantasies about being treated sadistically. I think you're trying to turn that idea upside-down. Isn't all this really about what you - as a male - want to integrate into sex?

You also keep quouting 'Mary Whitehouse', like I was her biggest supporter. Now, you really are talking out your backside here - jumping to any half-baked idea that aids your cause. No, I couldn't give a damn about a woman who's been dead a long time.

I happen to like pornagraphy . . . it's just that I think sadism is a separate issue and falls into the category of abusive behaviour (like paedophilia).
>

> Come again? Are you trying to say rape and women wearing
> stockings and suspenders are the same thing?


Again, you take things out of context to aid your argument. The point you actually made previously was this:

> That's like saying "What have stockings and suspenders to do
> with sex?" For some people choking, slapping and spitting have
> a great deal to do with sex.

To which I replied:

. . . And by the same token for some people RAPE has a lot do do with sex.

Interesting that you've conveniently edited-out the bit about the choking, slapping and spitting . . .

Alex wrote:

> No, I'm into two consenting adults having the right to behave
> as they wish in porn films. As opposed to you believing you are
> God and have the right to tell everyone else how they can have
> sex.

No, I don't view myself as some kind of God figure dictating what people can or can't do. I'm offering my opnion on the subject. Isn't that what Forums exist for? An exchange of iopinions and ideas.

The original poster of this thread expressed a dislike for violent behaviour in porno movies - to which I've agreed.

You don't like opnions that are contrary to your own. That's the real problem here . . .

This sort of stuff is not my cup of tea but I do think models have the choice to do what they are happy with... they can also "hopefully" end the shoot at any time......

We all know this stuff exists and as long as models consent to do it... producers make it and the punters buy it it will continue.... threads like this make people aware this product is available as well as allow people to discuss pro's and con's and air views so it is all a double edged sword...

I have also seen stuff where men are subjected to extreme humiliation by women......

Michelle

Michelle wrote:

> I have also seen stuff where men are subjected to extreme
> humiliation by women......
>
> Michelle

Hey, Michelle, you've got a good point there.

Several weeks ago I bowed to pressure and agreed to buy a pet dog for my wife and daughter.

Now it's a case of, "The dog's done a big turd in the garden, and it's your job to clean his mess up . . ."

I can't think of anything more humiliating than cleaning up dog-shit (lol).

Have to admit I've never seen any of that Donkey Punching stuff. That could lead to fatality! Nasty. They must be f******g mad to in for that though.

dave78 wrote:

> Have to admit I've never seen any of that Donkey Punching
> stuff. That could lead to fatality! Nasty. They must be
> f******g mad to in for that though.
>
>


It's all about out-doing what's gone on before. In the not-too-distant future, 'Donkey Punching' will be tame stuff - as the Producers of this sadistic crap have to come up with more outlandish crap. Maybe Alex can offer some suggestions?

>>The original poster of this thread expressed a dislike for violent >>behaviour in porno movies - to which I've agreed.

So what was all that nonsense about rough sex between consenting adults being the same as paedophilia?

If your point is simply that rough sex doesn't float your boat then that's fine.

>>This isn't about fantasy play-acting; the thread was about violence

I'm sorry but porno films are play-acting. That's the whole point. When you see a porn film and see a 50 year old guy walk in and and shag his 20 year old blonde secretary in the office that's not real life. It's play-acting.

>>and I can assure you that if I ever raised my hand to her

That wasn't the point. The point is if your wife ASKED you to fulfill a rough sex fantasy for her. There is a difference between a sex fantasy and real life.

>>I happen to like pornagraphy . . . it's just that I think sadism is a >>separate issue and falls into the category of abusive behaviour (like >>paedophilia).

You don't seem to be able to grasp the difference between sexual fantasy and reality.

>>. . . And by the same token for some people RAPE has a lot do do with sex.


I don't know where you get this idea from. As far as I'm concerned rape has precious little to do with sex. And I'm still not sure how you get from stockings and suspenders to rape.

>>Maybe Alex can offer some suggestions?

A threesome with Bernard Manning?