Porn off the beaten path

[Beth]

I was looking up stretch marks for a Wiki Article I was thinking of working on and I came across a whole slew of sights for "Stretch mark boob" porn :wtf:-which puzzled me at first, "Reat fat stretch mark Mamas" porn that showed morbidly obese women in poses and having sex, I suppose, then I looked further, there were links to saggy boob porn: the boobs were so pendulous they were down to the navels in some pics. I then did another search with different wording on stretch marks. It led me to an incest site but on google it looked like it was about stretch marks. It had gay incest, violent incest, daddy and daughter incest. I never went to look at those sites because it was just upsetting. I did not bother trying to see what I could find in :sheepshag: :humping:.

I was amazed at the porn I had seen. I found no site for man boob porn or fat man porn even though there were ample amounts of obese women porn out there for men. :chin: ( I did actively search for these two topics, though.) It makes me wonder if women are straighter then men, or maybe some of us get to see all the man boobs (personally, I associate man boobs with dear old dad in law :eek: thus no attraction at all) and large bellies they could ever need at home. I wonder why there seems to be less specialized porn out there for women. We cannot all be sexual saints, can we? :innocent: -Well, I never looked to see if there was Thornbirds porn out there...hmmm...

Anyway, my once apparantly vanilla mind is blown.

Yes, I decided to play with smilies in a post for once.

[viscousmemories]

Good smilie use. :)

After 10 years of surfing the 'net I thought I'd seen everything, but I have to admit this is the very first time I've even heard of a stretch mark fetish. Fascinating.

I'm not really sure why there isn't more specialized porn for women. It never really occurred to me to wonder, since as I understand it most women aren't as susceptible to visual stimulation as men. It's a good question though.

[Sweetie]

I wonder why there seems to be less specialized porn out there for women.

a) men are more visual
b) I and perhaps some women are more responsible and realistic, consequence/embarassment/visualization=how does that visualization relate to reality ie: at the same time I see beastiality I see and smell animal shit, smell a barn, see animal shit on my foot, smell the animal and it stinks. For me to see a visualization is to see at the same time reality because I immediately put the visualization in context. Maybe that has something to do with women having better memories or something.
c) men are more beastial while women are more cerebral as far as sex is concerned

So in that sense, the target for women would be things more like romance novels with intense sex scenes where the context is built and it's acceptable, etc. Men to me have always seemed more to like something hard-core (visual) while women something subtle, slow and sensual (story). So men can see something, the point, the climax and ignore context, women would need an acceptable context to have the something, the point, the climax have much value.

I don't know anything and that's only generalities, for instance, I know men who aren't into porn much which doesn't necessarily change the matter because some of them when they look at a woman in a mag see disease in the sense of STDs or a cheap woman, that doesn't make them less visual, but anyways, some of my thoughts.

[Adora]

It makes me wonder if women are straighter then men, or maybe some of us get to see all the man boobs (personally, I associate man boobs with dear old dad in law thus no attraction at all) and large bellies they could ever need at home.
I've been told that extreme-body-porn of any kind (from piercing to mutilation to inflation to feeder-porn to focusing on a specific part of the body like feet or stretch-marks etc) is a control fantasy for the viewer. Somehow they feel they're responsible for the change in the subject's body, and get turned on by that.

Because of the way women are socialised, they're less likely to have sexual-control kinks/fantasies/fetishes. Not to say they don't completely, or that they don't have the opposite form (ie-surrendering control) but it's far less common in women than it is in men.

Women straighter? Nu uh. I think it's simply that women don't look at porn as much, both because the current majority of pornography doesn't satisfy their desires (most of it is made by men for men), and because it's still viewed to not be a good thing for females to do. I don't buy into the "women are less visual/bestial (whatever the hell that's meant to mean) than men" generalisation crap though.

[Beth]

Good smilie use. :) :) Thanky!

After 10 years of surfing the 'net I thought I'd seen everything, but I have to admit this is the very first time I've even heard of a stretch mark fetish. Fascinating.
Hehe. I know. I thought it the oddest thing. I mean, after a baby, we work hard on trying to get rid of dem suckers-now guys like them?

[Beth]

I wonder why there seems to be less specialized porn out there for women.

a) men are more visual
b) I and perhaps some women are more responsible and realistic, consequence/embarassment/visualization=how does that visualization relate to reality ie: at the same time I see beastiality I see and smell animal shit, smell a barn, see animal shit on my foot, smell the animal and it stinks. For me to see a visualization is to see at the same time reality because I immediately put the visualization in context. Maybe that has something to do with women having better memories or something.
I am not into beastiality and do not find it a particularly moral thing. I probably would be upset if I saw that my husband was into looking at such pics as animal screwing because I would begin to question what is going on in that head of his. But when I think of beastiality, I really do not see the imagery that you do. I think of peanut butter and cowboys being overly attached to their horses.

I suppose, though, I am more realistic in my desires.

c) men are more beastial while women are more cerebral as far as sex is concerned .
Well, it appears that women and men have structural differences in the cerebral cortex. Ones that make a woman more prone to be stimulated by language, while men more visually stimulated. I am sure it is not set for all men and women.

So in that sense, the target for women would be things more like romance novels with intense sex scenes where the context is built and it's acceptable, etc. Men to me have always seemed more to like something hard-core (visual) while women something subtle, slow and sensual (story).

So men can see something, the point, the climax and ignore context, women would need an acceptable context to have the something, the point, the climax have much value. I think alot of this is true, although I admit that Reginauld's throbbing member plummeting inside Regina's quivering womanhood while hiding in a cave-during a thunderstorm- from the evil Count Vlad does not do alot for me. :p

I don't know anything and that's only generalities, for instance, I know men who aren't into porn much which doesn't necessarily change the matter because some of them when they look at a woman in a mag see disease in the sense of STDs or a cheap woman, that doesn't make them less visual, but anyways, some of my thoughts.Althought generalities, I think you showed some insight. But I will say that my mind and thought process is very visual.

[Beth]

It makes me wonder if women are straighter then men, or maybe some of us get to see all the man boobs (personally, I associate man boobs with dear old dad in law thus no attraction at all) and large bellies they could ever need at home.
I've been told that extreme-body-porn of any kind (from piercing to mutilation to inflation to feeder-porn to focusing on a specific part of the body like feet or stretch-marks etc) is a control fantasy for the viewer. Somehow they feel they're responsible for the change in the subject's body, and get turned on by that.

Because of the way women are socialised, they're less likely to have sexual-control kinks/fantasies/fetishes. Not to say they don't completely, or that they don't have the opposite form (ie-surrendering control) but it's far less common in women than it is in men. Ah, very interesting. I suppose that even stretch marks could be a form of control. A man could visualize that he had been the cause for the stretch marks to marr her body. That is a little wierd though, almost violent, if using the logic I just offered. Maybe some men also associate stretch marks to motherhood (pregnancy) and see it as a sexual and loving (almost self sacrificial?) and nuturing thing . That seems a nicer fetish if looking at it like this.

Women straighter? Nu uh. I think it's simply that women don't look at porn as much, both because the current majority of pornography doesn't satisfy their desires (most of it is made by men for men), and because it's still viewed to not be a good thing for females to do. I don't buy into the "women are less visual/bestial (whatever the hell that's meant to mean) than men" generalisation crap though. Ah. I have seen some porn for women, produced by women; it seems so cheesy. I also wonder if we are often too busy with responsibility and even children to sit and relax and indulge in porn.

[viscousmemories]

I don't buy into the "women are less visual/bestial (whatever the hell that's meant to mean) than men" generalisation crap though.
I've long been under the impression that it was accepted as fact in the neuroscientific and psychological community that there are distinct differences between men and women when it comes to visual pornography. Here's one study (http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu/internet/neuroscience/Education/Spring2005NESC720/Hamann.pdf) that goes into some depth on the phenomenon. Do you know of any research that contradicts this, or do you mean something else?

[Adora]

Ah. I have seen some porn for women, produced by women; it seems so cheesy.
So have I, and yes, it's as cheesy as Mills & Boon novels.

Do you know of any research that contradicts this, or do you mean something else?
I mean something else. You simply can't measure the supposed "pure" based neurological differences with something like this because of the sheer scale of the difference in the sexual socialisation of the two genders. For example, most women masturbate, but most women will not admit to it when asked face-to-face about it in a format where men would, because it's seen as socially acceptable for me to do it and admit to it. The same goes for porn- the majority of it is made for men, by men, and it is still more socially acceptable in most of society for men to watch porn while there are hangups about women doing it. Not to mention the simple fact that it's easy to socialise someone into liking something such as sexual visual stimulation with only a weak natural predisposition if the environment is right.

If women and men were on an equal footing in this situation before the research, I might give some credence too it. But there are far too many social variables for me to take it seriously. And the study says itself: they showed the same sexual stimuli to both males and females. If it was the average porn vid, no wonder women's sexual response was less than the males.

What I mean is: I'm not saying men are not turned on in our society more by visual sexual stimulation than women. I'm simply saying I don't buy the theory that this is mostly because of some essential biological difference between men and women. I see too many social factors in the equation to simplify it that far.

[Ensign Steve]

But if you like anecdotal evidence, read on! Visual stimulation is about the only thing that does it for me. Literotica, dirty talk, what-have-you, you can keep it. I want pictures and video!

:runaway:

[viscousmemories]

What I mean is: I'm not saying men are not turned on in our society more by visual sexual stimulation than women. I'm simply saying I don't buy the theory that this is mostly because of some essential biological difference between men and women. I see too many social factors in the equation to simplify it that far.
Ah, okay. Yeah that makes good sense. The only qualifier I might add is that it seems possible that the egg came before the chicken, i.e. sexual imagery in our culture is predominantly oriented toward males because males are predisposed to be stimulated by it. But I don't suppose that makes much of a difference to your point that socialization plays a large role at this juncture. I'd have to say you're probably right about that.

[viscousmemories]

But if you like anecdotal evidence, read on! Visual stimulation is about the only thing that does it for me. Literotica, dirty talk, what-have-you, you can keep it. I want pictures and video!

:runaway:
Interesting. In depends on my mood which I prefer on any given day, but as a general rule I enjoy written porn as much as visual. :yup:

[godfry n. glad]

Nude femininity does it for me. So I guess visual is primary. Tactile is pretty important. Olfactory is pretty important, too.

'cuse me...

godfry

[godfry n. glad]

The only qualifier I might add is that it seems possible that the egg came before the chicken, i.e. sexual imagery in our culture is predominantly oriented toward males because males are predisposed to be stimulated by it. But I don't suppose that makes much of a difference to your point that socialization plays a large role at this juncture. I'd have to say you're probably right about that.

SIDEBAR:

It is not only possible, but assured that the egg came before the chicken. Eggs have been found early in strata long before anything like a chicken has been found. Eggs precede chickens by whole geologic eras.

There is no question. Eggs came first. Chickens came later.

We now return you to our regular programming....

[godfry n. glad]

But if you like anecdotal evidence, read on! Visual stimulation is about the only thing that does it for me. Literotica, dirty talk, what-have-you, you can keep it. I want pictures and video!

:runaway:

Like I said earlier, we have a saint in our midst.

Most women I've known in my life have not been interested in visual pornography. Every one of them has been quite keen on written pornography. You are, in my experience, an exception.

fodgry :lecher:

[Sweetie]

Well, it appears that women and men have structural differences in the cerebral cortex. Ones that make a woman more prone to be stimulated by language, while men more visually stimulated. I am sure it is not set for all men and women.

Yes, I wouldn't think that all men and women fit into boxes. What I mean by cerebral/bestial I would put this way from my experience. For women, from many women I've encountered but primarily for me, my primary errogeneous zone is my mind so that's what I mean by cerebral. Sure my body gets stimulated by external things, touch and such, and visual images too but not in the same way and as far as that goes, external touch or visual images alone compared to a mental/internal stimulation, well, the two as experiences for me aren't even comparable, they're not in the same ball park, the former I could honestly take it or leave it. I would say or guess for men though as far as the term I used "beastial" is concerned, their primary errogenous zone is their penis, so in that sense bestial/physical/instinctive. The reason why I didn't try to put it into words before because of the difficulty that arises with how I have put it into words, I mean, obviously there has to be some brain activity going on for men, ie: eye to brain to penis but, it's hard to describe.

At the very least I could put it into these terms, if I wanted to get a man in my bed or into a relationship, or a woman, I would go about it in two totally different ways.

I think alot of this is true, although I admit that Reginauld's throbbing member plummeting inside Regina's quivering womanhood while hiding in a cave-during a thunderstorm- from the evil Count Vlad does not do alot for me. :p

:D Yeah, but there's good and bad literature just as much as there's good and bad porn. To be honest though, I think I read Gone With the Wind and it's funny because there are actually no sex scenes in the whole novel, there are allusions to, sure, but nothing other than that and even still, this novel had engaged my mind, not to an intense degree or anything but as a sort of setting the stage type of thing. As far as that goes, actual sex scenes in many novels are just pathetic and yet you can have a well-written story that has more of a fore-play and all the lead up to without anything explicit and the one accomplished what the other one didn't even touch.

[Sweetie]

I've long been under the impression that it was accepted as fact in the neuroscientific and psychological community that there are distinct differences between men and women when it comes to visual pornography. Here's one study (http://www.healthsystem.virginia.edu/internet/neuroscience/Education/Spring2005NESC720/Hamann.pdf) that goes into some depth on the phenomenon. Do you know of any research that contradicts this, or do you mean something else?

Looks like an interesting read. I was looking for some study on the subject but, lol, when you type in "men/woman - errogenous zone" as a search criteria, it doesn't necessarily bring up anything useful. :D Well, I suppose it depends what you mean by "useful" and who's saying it. :P

[Godless Dave]

I found no site for man boob porn or fat man porn

Dammit, there goes another one of my money-making schemes.

[Shake]

Different strokes for different folks, I guess. Anyway, I think OM treats the matter fairly well in this rant (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?p=2121440#post2121440). :yup: :P

[viscousmemories]

Looks like an interesting read. I was looking for some study on the subject but, lol, when you type in "men/woman - errogenous zone" as a search criteria, it doesn't necessarily bring up anything useful. :D Well, I suppose it depends what you mean by "useful" and who's saying it. :P
Hehe. Yeah, I anticipated issues so I made sure to use the word 'neuroscience'. Not a lot of porn sites manage to finagle that word into a storyline. :D