When Dating..

Post Reply New Topic

This is why I think guys who say "I don't care about looks" are full of bs. They may have not wanted to put the effort into meeting someone that's their visual type, or they may have been incapable of attracting that type anyway, and they might walk around high and mighty saying "I'm happy with 'my girl' " but in reality, at night they have the same desires every other guy has, maybe even worse.

Here's where things get tricky....
Lots of guys like very young looking women, it varies. Lots of guys like it a bit rough, or very rough, it varies. Lots of guys like it really kinky and straight up freaky, it varies.
Most of them, despite their broad array of impulses of arousal, put a muzzle on it and act within a smaller, 'acceptable envelope' of modern behavior. We put up barriers, we draw lines, we actually spend quite a lot of mental and social energy countering lots of our impulses, and reinforcing our barrier, to the point that we've become accustomed to it. It's automatic, not unlike breathing.

So that's my point #1: Just because the impulse is not visible on the surface doesn't mean it's not there.

But look at other cultures. In, say, Saudi Arabia. From what I understand(which is little), arranged marriage between an older man and a girl in her early teens is not uncommon. And let's not carry any illusions here, we're talking about sex. On the assumption that this is not rare, and on the assumption the older man thinks this is a swell idea, then it stands to reason that this is a common sexual impulse. Or lets look at early American settlers. I recall the tale of Miles Standish or whatever his name was, and Sacajawea. I think it turned out Sacajawea was like 14? 12? something like that? Yeah. That's Western culture, right there. And we know his name to this day, not because he was reviled, but because the guy became lauded for his actions. Thus illustrating that the people around him didn't necessarily think he was doing something wrong with that girl. All that said, I could be carrying many factual errors in these examples. However, there are myriad more examples all throughout history, and modern culture too. Bare in mind that this is a small example regarding men only, within the lens of pedophilia, one of the most damning labels a man can wear, and only one out many potential anti-social behaviors available in modern culture. So my broader point isn't about pedophilia at all, but about perceived 'normalcy of thought.'

So my point #2 is: Just because we have a funky impulse doesn't make us bad-wrong creeps, especially if it is never acted upon.

And I forgot my third point, so I guess I'll be sparing you that added word-count.

Now, seemingly you have an idea about what is okay for your husband to think and feel. And I get the impression that things outside of that envelope of acceptable thoughts and impulses - remembering that they don't translate in to action - would include something like rough sex with an anonymous 18 your old woman. Now, you're welcome to the lines you draw, and the judgments you stand by. Perhaps they are one's I'd agree with. Just recognize them as a judgment according to your personal criteria, an assertion upon what it's okay for that person to think. That's slippery, tricky stuff, there.

I see a lot of folks take these judgment extremely far, and assert right-and-wrong pronouncement upon some things that might arguably be considered our instinctual thoughts, even though there was no action to follow up on the thoughts.
This strikes me as exceptionally self-centered, for lack of a better word, to think that their thought policing is acceptable.
When the issue of porn as compared to morality comes up, or the notion of deviancy is asserted due to porn, thought policing seems to come out in full force, and it bugs the heck out of me.

All that said, don't take any of this as a claim that there are no boundaries, or that there's no such thing as effective social/sexual deviancy. It's not binary; Like many things, the 'truth' lies in between. It's simply the aggressive assertion of one person's personal morals that are my issue, here. I see it happen a lot, and many times I think it's unwarranted, especially when some people get all horrified about what is, effectively, mainstream porn.

...And it strikes me as hypocritical.
Republican politicians and 'the sanctity of marriage,' anyone?
[/End minor rant.]

Exactly.
Perhaps a guy or girl will simply take whatever they can get - That's how I'd act if I couldn't seem to get any attention - But it most certainly isn't the same thing as putting no value on looks.

Absolutely agree, @Sound.

I care about that if I recognise it and they can be honest about it rather than hiding it. It's happened before. Anyway, my ex said she sometimes watched porn when she masturbated, and it didn't bother me except that she alluded that it might be gay skinhead porn. I was bothered, but that's for a few reasons, like I find skinheads unsettling anyway. But then I thought, 'whatever, what's it got to do with me? Nothing.'

I just don't see it this way. I, personally, don't think of porn as cheating. I don't find it offensive. But I also know that each and every one of us has insecurites. I don't think that asking someone not to look at porn is putting a burden on them. How could viewing porn be so important to an individual that it would take prescendent over their partner? That to me screams "Problem."

I also think everyone knows that everyone has fantasies in their head. I don't believe that each and every one of them needs to be shared with a partner. Many people would rather not hear that their partner is fantasizing about someone else. What is the point of broadcasting this fantasy? As for this: You might as well simply instruct your partner to tell you that they only ever think about you. It's a sham. : Maybe their partners don't want to hear about what is going on inside their heads about other people. What makes that wrong?

I find it strange that people are putting more emphasis on this need to view porn than they are on what is healthy for BOTH people in the relationship. I simply can't imagine anything more important than making my partner feel valued and secure.

So my point #2 is: Just because we have a funky impulse doesn't make us bad-wrong creeps, especially if it is never acted upon.

I think searching out pictures of this funky impulse and enjoying the impulse is a very short jump to acting on it. VERY fine. Some people are OK with the thought, but spending time searching out images to fulfill that impulse is not a far stretch for searching out the real thing. Use the internet to find pictures....use the internet to find a person like that.

I also know quite a few men (friends) who would look at certain fetish porn. When asked if they ever did that with their partners, they wouldn't even bring up what they wanted sexually to their partners. They were afraid of the reaction. SO instead, they hide it. How is that more acceptable than someone telling you they don't like it?

I couldn't be with someone who fantasized about killing people. It absolutely creeps me out. If I knew about those thoughts, I couldn't handle it. Some thoughts are better left inside someone's head. I would also end a relationship if I saw someone searching for pictures of murdering people on the internet. It's something I would never be able to live with. I don't think there is anything inherently wrong wtih me for finding that offensive. I can't change my feelings anymore that someone wtih that obsession could change theirs. I would rather have someone think about something in their head than go try to find something visual to amplify that thought. Searching for the pictures would be action enough to repulse me. That's why I can relate to people's aversion to porn.

I am aware that my bf was married before and clearly had sex before (he has a son). I don't need to know the details of his sex life, nor do I want to. I am sure there were things he enjoyed about his sexual relationship wtih her-- but I don't feel the need nor desire to know it in relation to her. I suspect (from conversations I have had with people who are opposed to porn viewing) that porn appears the same way to others. Having something inside one's head is one thing. Going out and searchng for pictures of it takes the next step. What is to stop the step after that?

Look Michelle, the idea that looking at fetish porn and getting involved in a fetish scene - or in some kind of real-life scenario - is a short leap is just incorrect. Just one example: many, many men and women masturbate to rape fantasies. It does not mean that the men are closet rapists who would rape if given the opportunity. It does not mean the women want to be raped: actual rape is not about sex, it's about violence. And guess what? If a man and woman agree to act out a rape fantasy - for their mutual pleasure - that's called consensual sex. They're both agreeing to participate, they're both role-playing, they're both getting off - and neither one is getting hurt or hurting anyone else.

Honestly, most people who are interested in sexual fetishes indulge them primarily through porn and masturbation. (If most people wanted to act their fetishes out, there would be a dungeon on every corner.) But for the people who do want to act them out, again - I don't understand the stigma. (And it seems like you're attaching a stigma, because you believe that "acting" on an impulse is a bad thing.) By stigmatizing sexual interests, you're advocating the creation of the scenario you described: men (or women) have interests that they indulge in secrecy and shame. How does that contribute to intimacy in a relationship?

And where did the idea of murder fantasies come up? I have to admit, I don't know any statistics on that particular fetish (assuming it exists), but I'm thinking even your local dungeon doesn't have a "murder" room set up. And I guess that's what really bothers me about the attitude you describe: we can't talk about porn - that depicts legal, consensual sex between adults - without bringing up the most abhorrent, sexually deviant behavior around - and somehow equating the two. That just seems like a fundamental lack of understanding of the human condition. I just don't get it.

I don't understand how making your partner feel shame about material they use to masturbate equals making them feel valued and secure? Shaming someone only makes them feel sick, twisted, and wrong - the polar opposite of valued and secure.

I think the issue here is that the incredibly negative judgment society (mostly women) places on porn is absolutely unjustified and unreasonable.

So saying you are offended by something makes someone feel shame? I don't understand how asking someone to use another aide in masterbation is shaming them. I don't see it at all.

I wasn't necessarily referring to murder fantasies as a sexual thing, but its a HUGE interest for some people. If someone I was with was looking at pictures of it, I would be sick. My point is, I understand not agreeing with being "OK" with everything your partner wants to do. That's life. That's how it goes. Everybody compromises somewhere. No one can help what they enjoy in their head, but its also OK to leave things in your head so as not to hurt someone. I wasn't relating the 2 topics, just the understanding that not everything needs to be indulged.

I also don't believe that acting on any impulse is a bad thing. I think its a bad thing if its going to hurt the person you love (and that will vary from couple to couple). Masterbation may be something someone needs-- but there are many aides to use in order to make it more pleasurable. To say that it can only be one and to act like porn is the absolute only thing one can use to masterbate is crazy to me.

I have known men that are great with their wives using toys-- but didn't like the dildos that looked realistic. They wanted them to get purple or something that looked a little less "real." OK. Compromise. Sexuality is both for personal pleasure and someone else's pleasure. If its only about making one person happy, they aren't in a relationship at all. I am not advocating hiding or shaming a person. However, I am advocating coming to an agreement both parties can live with, accept, and feel comfortable with. There isn't just one avenue to take or explore.

How can it not make them feel shame? Shame is a natural reaction to feeling bad that you have offended somebody. If you want to prod the person into stopping without being ashamed, you don't tell them you are offended by that (which makes it sound like they are a bad person for enjoying something offensive- thus the shame), you tell them that it makes you feel uncomfortable or some other thing which keeps the onus on you. This either opens a dialogue or makes them do a better job of hiding it. If you tell them you are actually offended by it, a wall will slam down between the two of you which will lead to less intimacy, not more. (Of course that may also happen if you tell them it makes you uncomfortable.)

I suspect that would vary from person to person. I don't feel shame when I offend someone or when something I did was offensive to them. I am glad I know it and would prefer not to offend them again, if possible. In this case, I could see how telling someone that masterbation was offensive may be shameful. But asking them to use another aide? That I don't see as offensive.

NOT being able to tell someone that something makes you uncomfortable or that you are offended by something will very likely also lead to less intimacy. Both partners needs have to be able to be taken into account.

This.

Question: Why would anyone ever hide something in this vein from their partner?
Hypothesis: Shame and fear, the vast majority of the time.

If a partner is having a mainstream impulse, it seems to me that the 'lesser of two evils' is to learn to accept their desires, and foster a relationship environment where they no longer feel they need to hide their thoughts and desires. I mean, it's a pity that both don't intrinsically feel mostly the same, and that this becomes an issue at all. But the worse outcome, to my mind, is one where open honesty and a feeling of validation and acceptance is compromised. This is to be compared with the 'offended' individual learning to grow a thicker skin and learn to lay aside their jealousy.
It's a sub-optimal solution either way. But having one person maneuver around the others' insecurities seems worse, to me, than the other person undertaking the work to abandon an insecurity.

....Also, I'm glad we're getting away from talking about the more 'extreme' stuff. In all my years, I'm not sure I've ever come across any of that stuff even once. I don't deny it's out there, but no one here's proposing allowing it into the realm of social acceptability. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think mainstream porn is the bridge we stand in front of. The conversation breaks down when we start talking about these outliers.

Perhaps it IS possible to learn to accept this "mainstream impulse," but there needs to be understanding and accepting on the other side. There is almost always a way to work through insecurities- why wouldn't you want to do it together? Not avoid the insecurity- face it head on.

And I just want to make sure I am clear again-- I was not bringing up the murdering thing as a comparison, but as something I found offensive. I try to put myself into someone's shoes and see things through their eyes. In order to do that, I need to find something I find offensive (very little). Just because something is widely accepted as "OK," doesn't make it right. Both members of the couple absolutely need to feel accepted and loved. Both need to compromise. Leaving either one of their own to deal with something that is important to them is a bunch of junk, as far as I am concerned.

Agreed in theory. In practice, this particular issue seems sorta like an all-or-nothing situation.
Either the porn-guy is shamed, or continues to feel shame, or he's not.
Either the offended-woman works to get over her insecurity, or she doesn't try.

If the notion is that the porn-guy is in the wrong, then why would the offended-woman even attempt to make the difficult change away from this jealousy? If the guy is to avoid porn, then clearly the answer is that he is wrong, not that she needs to get a thicker skin.
Or similarly if the notion is that the offended-woman is in the wrong, then why should the porn-guy feel bad about the impulses in question?

"You grow a thicker skin, and meanwhile I'll avoid porn"
....This just doesn't make sense, to me. In this particular circumstance, it seems more binary. If the relationship is to contain compromise, it'll have to be through the one of them backing down now, and the other backing down on a different issue.


Well, 1) you don't need to try to accept something that isn't mainstream. You don't need to accept murder porn. Therefore, it's even less of an issue here.
And 2) "widely accepted as OK" is the definition of common morality.
But that's extremely arguable, I recognize, and far beyond the scope of this thread.