Gothic.net Community

Gothic.net Community (https://www.gothic.net/boards/index.php)
-   Spooky News (https://www.gothic.net/boards/forumdisplay.php?f=14)
-   -   Women's erotica goes limp (https://www.gothic.net/boards/showthread.php?t=15835)

Saya 08-14-2009 11:43 AM

Women's erotica goes limp
 
Quote:

Filament, a magazine for women featuring semi-naked men, launched earlier this year to widespread media coverage. Issue 1 featured three photo sets of men, none of whom removed their trousers. While some questioned whether women would even buy visual erotica, Filament's readers soon put them straight. Not only were women buying it, they were asking for more explicit pictures.

That demand brought Filament smack up against the biggest problem in providing visual erotica for straight women: the pervasive nervousness about depictions of aroused men. Previous attempts to offer erotic imagery to women flopped when publications such as For Women and Playgirl offered only photography that many believed fell short of what women wanted from an adult mag.

Filament, responding to reader feedback, had planned to include a photo set of an aroused man in their second (September) issue. It's not illegal to print images of erections but the Obscene Publications Act is notoriously vague. After taking legal advice, Filament intended to make a test case of sorts. Its printers, however, refused, citing potential objections from "the women's/religious sectors". As a new, independent publisher, Filament can't yet afford more liberal-minded printers willing to tackle the taboo on tumescence.

It's the second major hurdle for Filament, which has already been turned down by numerous UK distributors refusing to handle a women's magazine with a man on the cover. When set against the plethora of men's lifestyle and top-shelf magazines featuring scantily clad and open-legged women, the struggles faced by Filament highlight a deeply entrenched sexism: men can look at women but women cannot look at men.

Attempts to even out this disparity often lead to cries that two wrongs don't make a right; that countering the prevalence of eroticised women by adding men to the mix legitimises sexist objectification. But there's nothing inherently sexist about depicting nudity. It's sexist when only women are deemed to signify the erotic; it's sexist when eroticised images of women are so normalised and widespread that women stand to be viewed first and foremost as sex objects – their value inextricably linked to their sexual desirability. The sexism is in the inequality.

In challenging a culture that positions women as sex-products for men, Filament isn't seeking to turn the tables in an act of vengeance. Instead, it's asking for women to be acknowledged as human beings who can look and lust just as men can.

While some contend the lack of female-oriented erotica reflects a lack of demand, claiming the free market would prevail if women wanted such material, Filament's experience of cockblocking proves otherwise. Perhaps what's most insidious in this saga is that the market's refusal to admit Filament reinforces an idea of female sexuality which justifies that very refusal. The absence of visual erotica for women on shelves crammed with magazines where women are products for male consumers, reduces female desire to the less-interested counterpart of male desire. The deficit positions women as the providers of sex for perpetually horny dudes. And so, runs the self-fulfilling logic, of course women don't want magazines targeting their desire. Women don't have desire, see? They merely receive it. How do we know? Just check out those magazine shelves.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...jects-magazine

I really don't get why its such a big deal. I've never seen Playgirl itself but I did see the Peter Steele pics, he stood proud. Why is a boner so taboo but tits and pussy are not?

JCC 08-14-2009 11:46 AM

Peter Steele is one ugly guy.

vindicatedxjin 08-14-2009 11:47 AM

Because unfortunately sexism is still an issue hidden behind closed doors.

Saya 08-14-2009 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JCC (Post 553338)
Peter Steele is one ugly guy.

Yeah but I had to look.

allyssa 08-14-2009 02:22 PM

whenever I search for dark sensual erotica, their is definitly more erotica for a femme/lesbian audience, I enjoy this but I also like men. So if their was tasteful and artistic erotica featuring men besides just their big cocks...more of their ethereal beauty..and less men in uniform crap... it would be lovely!
mainstream society is definitly fucked up, I am not surprised....just continually disapointed....

DRM 08-14-2009 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vindicatedxjin (Post 553339)
Because unfortunately sexism is still an issue hidden behind closed doors.

That and because the female body is sensual, curvey, graceful, and elegant. In my opion, it is more beautiful then the male body.

viscus 08-14-2009 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saya (Post 553337)
Why is a boner so taboo but tits and pussy are not?

Because people are accustomed to seeing the latter but not the former. Not saying it's right, and I wish Filament luck in their pursuit of acceptance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRM
That and because the female body is sensual, curvey, graceful, and elegant. In my opion, it is more beautiful then the male body.

Does your opinion reflect that of all women?

Saya 08-14-2009 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRM (Post 553441)
That and because the female body is sensual, curvey, graceful, and elegant. In my opion, it is more beautiful then the male body.

The male body is quite beautiful and sensual, and the magazine is trying to cater to women who agree with that. Don't try to paint it as putting women up on a pedestal and degrade men's bodies, its insulting to both sexes.

Solumina 08-14-2009 08:15 PM

Nude men can be quite aesthetically pleasing, there is no part of a woman's body that I find as appealing as a man's shoulders and upper back. Personally I'm not a huge fan of looking at penises but I'm also not a huge fan of looking at vaginae, they bot serve their purposes and they can both be fun to play with I just think that are kind of funny looking but I understand that other people are different.

Saya 08-14-2009 08:22 PM

Me neither to be honest, I had a look at their website though and it looks nice enough, and it looks pretty tasteful too so I doubt they tried to print anything really raunchy or hardcore.

I like written erotica better than visual but I wouldn't mind leafing through it myself, a few of their models are really attractive.

Pineapple_Juice 08-15-2009 12:13 AM

I wouldn't mind it either way-tastefully posed naked men or raunchily posed naked men.
What can I say? I like dudes. A lot.

CptSternn 08-15-2009 12:27 AM

Seinfeld put it best. 'A woman's body is a work of art. A man's body is a utilitarian. It's for gettin' around. It's like a Jeep.'

SiouxsiePernova 08-15-2009 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saya (Post 553449)
The male body is quite beautiful and sensual, and the magazine is trying to cater to women who agree with that. Don't try to paint it as putting women up on a pedestal and degrade men's bodies, its insulting to both sexes.

I think that both can be extremely aesthetically pleasing, but in different ways.

DRM 08-15-2009 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saya (Post 553449)
The male body is quite beautiful and sensual, and the magazine is trying to cater to women who agree with that. Don't try to paint it as putting women up on a pedestal and degrade men's bodies, its insulting to both sexes.

I never said the male body wasn't beautiful nor did I degrade it, I simplely said that I find the female body more beautiful then the male body.

Saya 08-15-2009 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRM (Post 553566)
I never said the male body wasn't beautiful nor did I degrade it, I simplely said that I find the female body more beautiful then the male body.

You also described the female body as " sensual, curvey, graceful, and elegant", as if men's bodies cannot be these things. Also you're only describing one type of body, both sexes have a lot of diversity.

DRM 08-15-2009 08:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saya (Post 553567)
You also described the female body as " sensual, curvey, graceful, and elegant", as if men's bodies cannot be these things. Also you're only describing one type of body, both sexes have a lot of diversity.

Okay, I phrased that poorly.
I did not intend to imply that males bodies could not be any of those things, I was only trying to say that I find the female figure more these things then I find the male figure. I'm sorry if I offended you with that statement.

Delkaetre 08-16-2009 06:41 PM

I might actually buy a copy to support it. It's the brainchild of a friend-of-a-friend, and my friend is actually writing in it. So I should probably be good and buy it.

Terminus 08-16-2009 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saya (Post 553337)
Why is a boner so taboo but tits and pussy are not?

My theory is that most guys don't want competition, and until now, guys have controlled this type of market.

Aerynna 08-16-2009 11:11 PM

As a straight gal, I do admire beautiful men if they were portrayed in positive light. They're still works of art just like the ladies, but graphic nudity isn't my thing unless it's artistic nudity, which is whole another subject. I agree about some men controlling the media making women less empowered when it comes to sexuality. They can't see it as equal partnership, after all, it's a man's world.

Reiko 08-17-2009 01:22 AM

Shame,

I'm not used to seeing men as beautiful sexual things. Usually if I see a man with an erect penis, I think of dirty sex or something to that effect. Or, some strong masculine hunter of some sort. But, it's changing over time.

Which is a shame because the penis is just as wonderful as the vulva.

Pineapple_Juice 08-17-2009 02:02 AM

I think the idea of considering a vulva or a penis as attractive is sort of weird. It's like saying "Man, you have the sexiest earlobe I've ever seen." What?

SiouxsiePernova 08-17-2009 06:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saya (Post 553337)
Why is a boner so taboo but tits and pussy are not?

Interestingly, in Australia, the opposite is the case. Pornographic magazines are only allowed to show "discreet genital detail" if they are to be distributed in all states without being wrapped in plastic. This guideline was somehow interpreted as only being applicable to women, so the magazines will not publish pictures of females with visible inner labia (they must either be edited out or obscured), yet naked men with or without erections can be depicted. It is really quite bizarre.

Saya 08-17-2009 08:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reiko (Post 553752)
Shame,

I'm not used to seeing men as beautiful sexual things. Usually if I see a man with an erect penis, I think of dirty sex or something to that effect. Or, some strong masculine hunter of some sort. But, it's changing over time.

Which is a shame because the penis is just as wonderful as the vulva.

Honestly I think thats part of the reason why people say "Oh women won't buy visual erotica", most erotica that I've seen that is supposed to be geared towards women usually has men that are hypermasculine macho beefcakes, which I never found at all attractive, so no I don't buy visual erotica. I'm considering buying Filament though, to show my support and also some of the guys in the magazine are very pretty, and I haven't seen that in erotica before. They also rely on their reader's taste, which is cool.

Siouxsie, thats funny, I wonder why it only applies to women?

Mark Anthony Quested 08-26-2009 02:30 PM

Erections, real sex and a plentiful cumshot could be seen in the mainstream film "9 Songs"; mainstream meaing openly available from HMV. And thanks to a loophole in the UK censorship legislation, little Tommy can go into HMV and legally buy the skin flick. It's a funny old world.

* * * *

Ladies' erotica! Oh, it brings back happy memories of working in Waterstones! When there were no customers to serve, no shelves to stack and tidy, no deliveries to unpack, and no autograph signings (Jilly Bleedin' Cooper again!), we would take the Black Lace novels off the shelf and have a little read!!! I still feel nostalgic for "The Stallion"!

Saya 08-28-2009 12:21 AM

Good news everyone!

They raised the money to switch printers so they can still go ahead and offend women by catering to women!

Pineapple_Juice 08-28-2009 03:48 AM

lulz


mssg2shrt

Mark Anthony Quested 08-28-2009 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saya (Post 557257)
Good news everyone!

They raised the money to switch printers so they can still go ahead and offend women by catering to women!

Shame Mary Whitehouse is no longer alive. She would have a good hard stare at the hard-ons and then bore us all about how shocked she was.

Ever seen her sucesssor? He looks like Penfold from "Dangermouse" and sounds like the archetypal nerd! Funny little chap! It must be hard viewing porno and horror movies all day and then telling people how shocked you are!

transsexual transylvania 08-29-2009 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRM (Post 553441)
That and because the female body is sensual, curvey, graceful, and elegant. In my opion, it is more beautiful then the male body.

The people who buy these magazines aren't buying it for the female body. Just because YOU think the female body looks better, doesn't mean you should have control over what other people get off on.

Mark Anthony Quested 08-29-2009 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saya (Post 553337)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...jects-magazine

I really don't get why its such a big deal. I've never seen Playgirl itself but I did see the Peter Steele pics, he stood proud. Why is a boner so taboo but tits and pussy are not?

Call me strange ("YOU'RE STRANGE!" Thank you, muchly!), but it seems to me that it must be hard staying hard whilst one is being photographed by a complete stranger!

I would imagine that the conversation between "model" and photographer would go something like this...

"A little more tumescence, if you please, darling. That's it!" SNAP. "And now dear, if you could make it dribble a little. That's it!" SNAP. "And now, give it a stroke. That's it!" SNAP. "Excuse me a second, dear, whilst I wipe the lens clean".

And how do you "model" a raging hard-on? I "model" one most nights in my sleep.

head in a wicker basket 08-29-2009 02:10 PM

While there are many "trade secrets" as to how one keep's a penis erect for long periods of time. I do not understand why nude erect men send women running the other way. Perhaps said women should be fucked hard and well. This of course is only my opinion and means nothing whatsoever as I am only a head in a wicker basket..

Mark Anthony Quested 08-29-2009 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by head in a wicker basket (Post 557795)
While there are many "trade secrets" as to how one keep's a penis erect for long periods of time. I do not understand why nude erect men send women running the other way. Perhaps said women should be fucked hard and well. This of course is only my opinion and means nothing whatsoever as I am only a head in a wicker basket..

My school sex education was sadly lacking!!!

head in a wicker basket 08-29-2009 07:37 PM

Poor thing! You should see if there is some sort of night classes near you. One should be well versed it penis erection and how to keep said erection. I am but a head and I know this ...

SiouxsiePernova 08-30-2009 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by head in a wicker basket (Post 557795)
I do not understand why nude erect men send women running the other way.

Maybe the women in question feel intimidated by such an overt display of male sexuality.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:56 AM.