[sudo-discuss] Erotica: superiority and inferiority.
GtwoG PublicOhOne
g2g-public01 at att.net
Sun May 5 22:00:53 PDT 2013
Sonja, Andrew, Et. Al.-
So now the implicit assumption goes explicit:
"Masturbation is a thing too thoroughly inferior to sex to be classed
with it."
The necessary and inevitable corollary to that is, "Single people are
thoroughly inferior to coupled people." Care to argue that point?
It wasn't long ago that us queerz were also subjected to "Homosexual sex
is a thing thoroughly inferior to heterosexual sex."
Inferior by way of "immoral," and for the longest time (and still, in
many places), illegal. In a wide swath of the world, I can go to prison
for who I love, and in a slightly less wide swath of the world, I can
get beheaded in the public square or hanged by the neck at the end of a
crane borrowed from the Public Works Department (as is the custom in
Iran, 16-year-old queer guys included, go search BBC.com for that story).
Comparisons based on assertions of one's own superiority and others'
inferiority, are the last refuge of the will-to-power mentality that is
exploitative, oppressive, and ultimately insecure of its own niche in
the human social ecosystem.
In any ontological sense, arguements about the superiority and
inferiority of personal matters of taste among consenting adults, are
groundless, pointless, and ultimately meaningless.
Would anyone care to argue whether rock is better than rap or
vice-versa, or whether jazz is better than country & western or
vice-versa, or whether playing a piano, harmonica, guitar, saxophone, or
banjo is better? Any such assertion of "better" (and its necessary
corollary, "worse"), is nothing more than a linguistic confound of the
phrase "I prefer."
I prefer music X, sexuality Y, and pizza with Z on it.
I have no need to prove to anyone, that any of those things are "better
than" music Q, sexuality R, and pizza with S on it. And I will fight
for the right to full equality among people who prefer music X or Q,
sexuality Y or R, and pizza with Z or S on it.
It will be a great day when people stop seeking to dominate each other
over matters of personal choice and personal taste. It will be an even
better day when people stop seeking to dominate each other altogether,
aside from consenting adult dom/sub play;-)
-G.
=====
On 13-05-05-Sun 12:29 PM, Sonja Trauss wrote:
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
>
> On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 1:58 AM, GtwoG PublicOhOne
> <g2g-public01 at att.net <mailto:g2g-public01 at att.net>> wrote:
>
>
> Sonja, Andrew, and Yo's-
>
> 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."
>
> To paraphrase an old Campbell's Soup ad, "It's Sex for One and
> that one is you!"
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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!
>
> 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.
>
> It's time to move beyond obedience to algorithms that no longer
> serve us.
>
> -G.
>
>
> ======
>
>
>
> On 13-05-05-Sun 1:22 AM, Sonja Trauss wrote:
>>
>> 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.
>> It also doesn't say anything about masturbation with or without
>> porn (although I wish it did).
>> Masturbation is all well and good, of course, but that's not
>> sufficient to explain why porn is well and good.
>> 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.
>>
>> On May 5, 2013 12:43 AM, "Andrew" <andrew at roshambomedia.com
>> <mailto:andrew at roshambomedia.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Sonja,
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> http://health.usnews.com/health-news/family-health/womens-health/articles/2011/08/01/study-tracks-masturbation-trends-among-us-teens
>>
>> It is also just, in general a healthy practice.
>>
>> second, I can masturbate without porn, and with porn (as can
>> most people).
>>
>> I really believe that part of being sex positive is also
>> being accepting of masturbation as natural and healthy.
>>
>> --Andrew
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 12:25 AM, Sonja Trauss
>> <sonja.trauss at gmail.com <mailto:sonja.trauss at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> 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.
>> 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.
>>
>> On May 4, 2013 7:53 PM, "Andrew"
>> <andrew at roshambomedia.com
>> <mailto:andrew at roshambomedia.com>> wrote:
>>
>> 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"
>>
>> On May 4, 2013 7:20 PM, "Sonja Trauss"
>> <sonja.trauss at gmail.com
>> <mailto:sonja.trauss at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Or less representation of sex altogether. What
>> does anyone need porn for?
>>
>> On May 4, 2013 7:10 PM, "Andrew"
>> <andrew at vagabondballroom.com
>> <mailto:andrew at vagabondballroom.com>> wrote:
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> On May 4, 2013 6:55 PM, "Sonja Trauss"
>> <sonja.trauss at gmail.com
>> <mailto:sonja.trauss at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Can I get a link for this gonorreah story?
>>
>> On May 4, 2013 6:42 PM, "GtwoG
>> PublicOhOne" <g2g-public01 at att.net
>> <mailto:g2g-public01 at att.net>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Romy & Yo's-
>>
>> Re. "womens' bodies with their faces
>> cut off."
>>
>> Wow. Thanks for pointing that out.
>> I never noticed that before (OTOH
>> attempts to do "sexy" in advertising
>> generally don't get my attention),
>> but I vaguely recall seeing ads like
>> that somewhere.
>>
>> I agree, a torso minus a face is
>> depersonalizing and objectifying as
>> hell, unless there's a very good
>> reason for taking a photo that way
>> (e.g. medical contexts). Being
>> looked at "that way" produces the creepy
>> feeling that the looker's intentions
>> are non-consensual.
>>
>> The only borderline-legit reason I
>> could see for doing it in clothing
>> ads is, "we want you to imagine
>> yourself wearing this, and we don't want
>> to risk putting you off by showing a
>> face that's substantially different
>> to yours, so imagine your face on
>> this person's body." But it would be
>> foolish to think that's what's
>> intended every time that photographic
>> method is used.
>>
>> This brings up the question of what
>> people find sexy in photography.
>> For me (gay male), a photo minus a
>> face is a non-starter: there's no cue
>> for communication with the person.
>> Nudes in general don't do it either:
>> all the usual contextual cues as to
>> someone's personality are missing,
>> so why would I even begin to imagine
>> being in an intimate context with
>> someone I don't really know? I've
>> always felt that way but now we have
>> the HIV pandemic to reinforce it: in
>> general it's not a good idea to get
>> intimate with someone you don't know
>> very well, because the outcome
>> could be a life-threatening illness.
>>
>> For that matter, now that
>> massively-drug-resistant gonorrhea is
>> loose in
>> the USA, which is hella' easier to
>> catch than HIV and can kill you in a
>> matter of days through a raging
>> bacterial infection, it's probably a
>> darn good idea for everyone to "get
>> smart & play safe" ALL the time,
>> zero exceptions, even more so than
>> with HIV. In which case photography
>> that portrays an objectified
>> sexuality without communications
>> isn't just
>> gross and exploitative, it's a public
>> health hazard that reinforces
>> attitudes that put people at risk for
>> their lives.
>>
>> -G.
>>
>>
>> =====
>>
>>
>> On 13-05-04-Sat 10:34 AM, Romy
>> Snowyla wrote:
>> > It's interesting to me how porn a
>> > Nd erotica always advertise with
>> women's bodies with their faces cut off
>> > American apparel digs this etc
>> > Lots of art theory discusses this
>> >
>> > 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
>> >
>> > Sent from my iPad
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> > sudo-discuss mailing list
>> > sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> <mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>
>> >
>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> <mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>
>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> <mailto:sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org>
>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> -------
>> Andrew Lowe
>> Cell: 831-332-2507 <tel:831-332-2507>
>> http://roshambomedia.com
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20130505/3fefec75/attachment.html>
More information about the sudo-discuss
mailing list