One of these days, I'll have to compile a list of bad arguments against porn.
One bad argument is that "porn causes human trafficking." I can see how this could be a valid argument if we're talking about certain subgenres. But what if a guy only views porn involving independent citizen women who are well into adulthood, and doesn't involve any coercion whatsoever?
You know what else often involves human trafficking? The garment industry. But you know, it's funny, I don't see the people who say nobody should view porn because of human trafficking also saying nobody should wear clothes.
Now, an argument could be made that shunning or banning all porn would reduce human trafficking, but you know what else would? Drastically lowering the quality of life/standard of living in the USA, because then there were would be fewer people who'd want to come here illegally.
An argument can also be made that shunning or banning all porn would INCREASE human trafficking, because it would be contraband and it can be easier to produce and distribute contraband by involving human trafficking.
Try one of these more honest objections:
"I don't like porn because I think the women are more sexually attractive than me and they do things I won't do."
"I don't like porn because I've been told I'm not supposed to."
"I don't like porn because men get auditory and visual erotic stimulation without having to spend a lot of money or deal with relationship hell."
Side note: You can now find me on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/TunaSafeDolphin
A look at the world from a sometimes sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek, decidedly American male perspective. Lately, this blog has been mostly about gender issues, dating, marriage, divorce, sex, and parenting via analyzing talk radio, advice columns, news stories, religion, and pop culture in general. I often challenge common platitudes, arguments. and subcultural elements perpetuated by fellow Evangelicals, social conservatives. Read at your own risk.
Monday, December 28, 2015
Monday, December 14, 2015
The Cycle
It's quite interesting how the system is rigged.
My wife generally puts off sex until the same time once per week, provided she's not on the rag or being especially hostile to me or ill in some way, as she frequently is.
Usually, this is a day I won't be working. This means she will sleep most of the day and I will be with the kids most of the day.
The kids can't be together for more than a couple of hours without hurting each other to the point of tears. Usually it involves head injuries. This probably irritates me more then it would otherwise because my wife keeps giving herself concussions and I'm resigned to the idea that she's going to be fully demented to the point of not being able to take care of the kids or drive herself.
The kids fighting is enough to mean I'm going to have to go another week without sex.
Then there's my reaction. After I've warned them to cut it out and leave each other alone (and pointed out one or both of them is going to get hurt) and they still keep it up and then one of them get hurt and is crying in pain, I often yell at them. And yelling, you see, it worse than kids giving each other concussions. It gives my wife the perfect excuse to reject me another week, and nag me about my reaction and demand I change some unrelated things about me.
Then there's my reaction. After I've warned them to cut it out and leave each other alone (and pointed out one or both of them is going to get hurt) and they still keep it up and then one of them get hurt and is crying in pain, I often yell at them. And yelling, you see, it worse than kids giving each other concussions. It gives my wife the perfect excuse to reject me another week, and nag me about my reaction and demand I change some unrelated things about me.
I'm going to start pushing for sex a day earlier. It probably won't work, because she's deliberately set it up this way, but I have nothing to lose I'm not already losing by wanting sex at all.
By the way, my wife's way of handling things with the kids, if she does at all, is to announce some unrealistic punishment that punishes us, especially me, more than the kids.
Mind you, my wife was really happy with me the day before and the day after this latest rejection, and telling me how much she loves me. But sex was not to be had. Because it wasn't the appointed day.
But, you know, I'm minding less and less when my wife sexually rejects me, because it really isn't much better than masturbating at this point, so rejection is getting to be less and less of a punishment. Yes, I enjoy a woman's body (the look, the feel, the smell and taste), yes, I like bringing pleasure to a woman, especially so my wife, but with her, it's a lot of work (no doubt thanks to medications) and the payoff is ...eh. It's like she doesn't care if she orgasms and when she does, it's like she tries to react as little as possible. It's like she doesn't enjoy sex, and does it out of duty. If I try to turn it up a notch or try something different, I feel like a pervert because she doesn't react one way or the other. Getting her to do anything but a corpse impersonation means I have to verbally ask her to do whatever it is I want, knowing that she's only willing to do a very few things and only certain ways, and the signals I get is that she either couldn't care less or dislikes whatever it is that we're doing.
Attention unmarried men: You, too, can sign a contract to give away over half of everything you'll ever earn in exchange for a lifetime of this.
Mind you, my wife was really happy with me the day before and the day after this latest rejection, and telling me how much she loves me. But sex was not to be had. Because it wasn't the appointed day.
But, you know, I'm minding less and less when my wife sexually rejects me, because it really isn't much better than masturbating at this point, so rejection is getting to be less and less of a punishment. Yes, I enjoy a woman's body (the look, the feel, the smell and taste), yes, I like bringing pleasure to a woman, especially so my wife, but with her, it's a lot of work (no doubt thanks to medications) and the payoff is ...eh. It's like she doesn't care if she orgasms and when she does, it's like she tries to react as little as possible. It's like she doesn't enjoy sex, and does it out of duty. If I try to turn it up a notch or try something different, I feel like a pervert because she doesn't react one way or the other. Getting her to do anything but a corpse impersonation means I have to verbally ask her to do whatever it is I want, knowing that she's only willing to do a very few things and only certain ways, and the signals I get is that she either couldn't care less or dislikes whatever it is that we're doing.
Attention unmarried men: You, too, can sign a contract to give away over half of everything you'll ever earn in exchange for a lifetime of this.
Thursday, December 03, 2015
He's Not Late, He's Just Holding Onto the Ball
The opening of each Tom Leykis Show is now like a Phil Hendrie bit, only Hendrie would do it much better. Leykis refuses to actually start his show until he has over 1,000 people listening live. Unlike terrestrial radio, he knows exactly how many people are listening to him live at any moment, because his show is done via the Internet, and since he is self-employed, he can decide when to start the show. This has proven to be handy when there has been something going on in the evening and he wants to do the show earlier.
So now... the interstitial music will play (a metal-ish instrumental piece) and every so often he'll speak up and say he's not going to start the show until there are enough people listening. Listeners do tend to "tune in" late, six, seven, eight minutes or more into the show, perhaps, for some, because Leykis himself has often started a little late in the past.
It sounds a little funny, almost like a toddler saying he's going to sit on his rubber ball until the other kids nearby do what he wants.
At the other end of the show, Leykis also often threatens to cut the show short for the day due to a lack of calls even though he often will talk for 90 minutes without taking call (and sometimes to tell a story he could tell in much less time). He has indeed cut the show short a few times, but on the other hand, he's sometimes honored "we'll keep going until the calls stop" the other way, too, by doing an extra hour or more. That makes for an interesting show.
I also find the show interesting when he'll tall to his crew for an hour. He won't announce that's what he's going to do; instead, it sounds entirely spontaneous. I used to tune out when he did that on corporate terrestrial radio, because it never was of any interest to me, but since he's now self-employe and running his own company and free of FCC broadcast restraints, those discussion are fascinating, especially when they talk "inside baseball" about the show, dealing with fans, and the radio industry.
While I do pick at his show here and there and have a few serious disagreements with him, I strongly appreciate his business model, professionalism, and ingenuity. If I know an hour is not going to interest me, I won't listen, but he does have some of the most interesting talk show content to be found anywhere. And everyone should listen to his regularly weekly "bonus hour" at 6 p.m. Pacific Time on Tuesdays with an attorney who gives free legal advice and alternates criminal law discussion with family law discussion. To be fair in getting back to the opening line of this entry - Hendrie and Leykis have completely different objectives, in that Hendrie does stuff like that to entertain, and Leykis does it to try to train his audience.
So now... the interstitial music will play (a metal-ish instrumental piece) and every so often he'll speak up and say he's not going to start the show until there are enough people listening. Listeners do tend to "tune in" late, six, seven, eight minutes or more into the show, perhaps, for some, because Leykis himself has often started a little late in the past.
It sounds a little funny, almost like a toddler saying he's going to sit on his rubber ball until the other kids nearby do what he wants.
At the other end of the show, Leykis also often threatens to cut the show short for the day due to a lack of calls even though he often will talk for 90 minutes without taking call (and sometimes to tell a story he could tell in much less time). He has indeed cut the show short a few times, but on the other hand, he's sometimes honored "we'll keep going until the calls stop" the other way, too, by doing an extra hour or more. That makes for an interesting show.
I also find the show interesting when he'll tall to his crew for an hour. He won't announce that's what he's going to do; instead, it sounds entirely spontaneous. I used to tune out when he did that on corporate terrestrial radio, because it never was of any interest to me, but since he's now self-employe and running his own company and free of FCC broadcast restraints, those discussion are fascinating, especially when they talk "inside baseball" about the show, dealing with fans, and the radio industry.
While I do pick at his show here and there and have a few serious disagreements with him, I strongly appreciate his business model, professionalism, and ingenuity. If I know an hour is not going to interest me, I won't listen, but he does have some of the most interesting talk show content to be found anywhere. And everyone should listen to his regularly weekly "bonus hour" at 6 p.m. Pacific Time on Tuesdays with an attorney who gives free legal advice and alternates criminal law discussion with family law discussion. To be fair in getting back to the opening line of this entry - Hendrie and Leykis have completely different objectives, in that Hendrie does stuff like that to entertain, and Leykis does it to try to train his audience.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)