Friday, February 15, 2013

We Banz Fun


It's two for one day with posts. Hooray maybe? Or not. Read on and decide as I delve very briefly into the complicated issue of pornography. Here's a recent article about Iceland's proposal to ban\block Internet access to pornography by its citizens.


A quote from an article about Iceland's internal proposal to block Internet access to pornographic content:

"At the moment, we are looking at the best technical ways to achieve this. But surely if we can send a man to the moon, we must be able to tackle porn on the internet."

Seriously? Someone thinks they can prevent people wanting to experience sex vicariously? Get real! Trying to stop access to pornography is like trying to count all the grains of sand on a beach. You might be able to do it if you crush the people with censorship, monitoring and other dictatorship-style tactics of control, but is it worth it? And why does the government think it needs to become the morality police? Government should handle infrastructure and growth issues of a nation, not morality. Leave personal decisions about morality to the community where the church or other guidance oriented facilities can talk to individuals.

I do agree the core intent to stop violent crimes related to forced participation in sex is necessary. But the near unilateral approach of banning a vice is what leads to overbearing regulations on how people should live their lives. In regards to banning, prohibition certainly didn't work for alcohol in the 30's as people simply shifted venues of where and how they obtained their booze. Sexual interactions in general, including exhibitionism and voyeurism which are intrinsically bound to pornography due to the actor/viewer connection, are more universal than drinking because we have an instinctual desire to recreate if not procreate.

Looking at the issue of pornography, no pun intended, there is too much degradation of women involved. But there are what I consider tastefully done presentations which are referred to as couples videos which are typically amateur created. These are interactions between two lovers, not between paid actors. The difference being there is more sensuality because the affection between both people is evident. Couples videos are filled with the heat of the moment. And its the spontaneity that makes them something more than the scripted, "watch me abuse my play-toy" movies produced by the mainstream industry that usually portrays individuals who seem to be hell bent on showing their prowess in bed by humiliating as many women as possible. The latter is far from a turn on, at least for me. I want to point out that I'm not advocating pornography for the general public. But I am saying some segments of the field can be aesthetically pleasing. For that matter, I have no problem with admitting I watch couples videos and thoroughly enjoy them. Take that Iceland!

My view point is that if you don't like pornography, don't watch it and don't hesitate to explain to others why they you believe they shouldn't watch it. But trying to forcibly prevent someone else from doing something "I" don't like is more nebulous in its correctness. Maybe my thoughts are inline with the common good, maybe they aren't. That's why I think explaining to someone why I think a particular genre is an unacceptable influence is a totally different scenario and quite acceptable.

Clearly the portrayal of women as objects or possessions is damaging to society. I will agree that pornography does establish a bar of sort that people use to judge others by as well as influencing individual actions. A poor model will cause many people will accept a fetish that is unhealthy. But realistically speaking, pornography and it's entanglement with society is like the cold virus: the ability to eradicate it is pretty much impossible. What we can do is can try to alter the environment that allows the unhealthy aspects of it to grow exponentially unchecked. Proper education and communication is key. Banning, on the other hand, makes it more of a forbidden fruit. And because it is forbidden, people with curiosities in that area will want to try it. Just my opinion. Rather than all-out banning pornography, keep it isolated from kids as best as possible. They don't have the developed social skills to understand the role-playing nature of sex yet. And equally as important, teach kids that women are equals and not property. Show the kids through example how to be respectful in a civil way.

Along those lines, I've noticed how a number of people misjudge me in this regard. In ways, it's underestimating my individual experiences. I feel like Rodney Dangerfield in saying "I get no respect" because someone who is viewed as inexperienced or naive is typically thought of in more of a childish way. More than a few people have considered me as tame and were surprised to hear me talk about risque topics. While I'm not exactly a social butterfly when it comes to frequent sexual encounters, that doesn't mean I'm not playful or knowledgeable. I know sexual culture, I know statistics as well as facts and yes Virginia, I even possess experience. I become especially irked when someone stereotypes like the dumb @ss remark I received recently during a conversation with a girl who made a rather unwise generalization about two concepts. I'm still seething over that one and probably will be for a long while. But on the subject of playfulness, there are hints and clues not only in my conversation, but are visible in my bedroom from the canopy around my bed as well as the mirror and the answer is clear I have a playful nature. Yeah, I know most people haven't seen pictures of my bedroom but anyone reading my posts for a while should have picked up on the vibes I emanate. I also understand that a canopy or mirror are tame. I could mention more sordid topics such as doggy straps or arm and leg restraints that slip under a mattress, but the conversation would take a rapid turn away from the content suitable for this blog. Basically, the point I'm attempting to establish is that I am rather free-form in a monogamous sense with one partner. 

In regards to how I interact personally, I'd rather treat my partner as an equal where mutual consent and safe haven communication are expected. By safe haven communication, I mean that once you go in the bedroom (symbolically), anything discussed is respected. There is no laughing or ridiculing the other person for what they say, do or even look like. Mutual consent and safety indicate both people are on equal footing and one does not dominate the other unless asked to do so. I don't think pornography in its current form even remotely supports or tries to enable this type of thinking. It reinforces negative attitudes and styles. A change is necessary but I think it begins at home and not just in the bedroom. The two different halves to a relationship are the ones who are responsible for making sure their relationship is healthy, not the government. 

Hey, it's bit too quiet around here for my liking. Quick, someone throw a record on the pornograph and let's make some noise. Oh wait, there's a ban on.