0714: "Porn For Women"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

sliverstorm
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 11:10 am UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby sliverstorm » Mon Mar 15, 2010 8:29 am UTC

ceruleanshipper wrote:*This is probably influenced by the fact that the clitoris is an elusive little bugger and for most women isn't directly simulated through classic heterosexual intercourse. That and American sex ed classes suck.

I've always wondered about that. There isn't any natural child-producing attack vector that does stimulate it particularly well. (emphasis on natural. Anything contortionist-esque or requiring especially aerobic feats don't count) Kind of seems like a failure on nature's part. Course, on the other hand, as we are still alive as a species it is impossible for nature to have failed. We should broaden our horizons. Who says it was supposed to be pleasurable anyway? Shouldn't we just be glad we aren't a species of traumatic insemination? 8)

Oh god... if we were, the feminist movement and the survival of the entire fscking human race would be diametrically opposed...

Jenni Nikki
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 3:21 am UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby Jenni Nikki » Mon Mar 15, 2010 8:32 am UTC

RockoTDF wrote:
Jenni Nikki wrote:
RockoTDF wrote:The point of the comic is to say that it is ok for women to have similar sexual interests of men, and that it might be sexist to say that doing chores around the house is something that women enjoy. He isn't "speaking on behalf of women" he is saying that "as a male, this situation seems odd, and I could see a woman writing a letter like this."

It's not sexist. Get over it. It's progress because a man is trying to see the world through a woman's eyes. It doesn't mean he will do it well, but it means he cares enough to try.


I agree, I don't feel that this is comic is sexist. You, however, are explaining your viewpoint of it as if speaking to a child. You are speaking as if the opinions of women who feel differently are invalid and you know better than them. Do you really think you know what is and is not sexist better than women?


My outburst came as the result of me being sick of how certain individuals on the fora are very quick to label things as sexist when they clearly aren't. I'm just sick of it. Some of it is childish. If I think an opinion is childish, then I will probably respond to it as such. People are entitled to an opinion. Nowhere in that construct does it say that my opinion can't be "their opinion is poorly thought out and in fact runs against the kind of progress they want to see in the world."


They clearly aren't sexist to you. You are assuming that their differing opinions, based on their differing experiences, are less valid than yours. Now, I don't know what all you are referring to, maybe some are childish. However, you were quite obviously referring to all that disagree with you, not just particular outliers.

As for "knowing what is sexist": Don't you think that as a male it is probably a good thing I know what does and does not constitute sexism so that I do not commit sexist acts, or tolerate those who do? Claiming that women should have some monopoly on determining what is and isn't sexist is like saying that only victims or a crime can define what a crime is. It just doesn't add up. I have been the victim of sexism far, far less in my life because I am a male. That is certain. But as someone with a background in experimental psychology, I place little or no value on anecdotal evidence or personal experience.


It is a good thing if you know what constitutes sexism and what does not. Knowing, however, is not the same thing as thinking you know and ignoring anyone who says otherwise. Even if you do know, if someone tells you, "Hey, that was sexist," you shouldn't automatically assume their wrong because it didn't sound sexist to you. You're not acting like you think you should have an equal viewpoint of what is or isn't sexist; you're acting as if you are the one who should have that monopoly you speak of.

And you're not impressing me with your 'background in experimental psychology'. I can't imagine that you've dug so deeply into truly understanding sexism through experimental psychology that you are doing anything other than going off of your own personal experiences either. Which you do admit are lacking in this subject.

Woopate wrote:I think he would have explained it the same way had it been a man making the argument he was discussing.


I don't think the comic would have made sense if a man had been the one writing the email.


He meant if a man was the one making the argument that the comic was sexist.

Woopate: I don't buy it, but if he were speaking to a man, it would not have the same connotations anyway.

sliverstorm
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 11:10 am UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby sliverstorm » Mon Mar 15, 2010 8:39 am UTC

cephalopod9 wrote:Also, people need to stop with the pop psychology; trying to explain to me how men and women are just sooo different! women are emotional! they like romance novels! it makes me want to stab someone.


If men and women really are so not different, I think you've just turned me on to the biggest success of my life. What you are saying has finally bridged the gender gap! Essentially what you are saying is women, just like men, want their porn to be of naked women fixing cars!

*shuffles off to make millions*



In your retaliatory actions based on your frustration towards this pop psychology, please don't forget that men and women *are* different. K? :wink: I'm fine with us being similar, but IMHO when we whitewash things and say 'NO. SAME. HEAR ME? SAME.' we are in just as much trouble.

User avatar
Woopate
Scrapple
Posts: 503
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:34 am UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby Woopate » Mon Mar 15, 2010 8:41 am UTC

Jenni Nikki wrote:
Woopate: I don't buy it, but if he were speaking to a man, it would not have the same connotations anyway.



Maybe the "Get over yourself" part. The first paragraph is fairly gender neutral.

sliverstorm
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 11:10 am UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby sliverstorm » Mon Mar 15, 2010 8:51 am UTC

ANY of you guys think the comic is sexist? :lol: Let me share something with you all.

I worked out where this is headed a few days ago.

People are arguing Randall's comic is sexist. After all, it stipulates that women do not like that kind of thing.

If Randall's comic stipulated that women do like that kind of thing, it would also have been sexist.

Thus, the only way to avoid being sexist is to avoid making statements about women at all. This is a horribly unfortunate outcome. First example that popped into my head is roses. How will a guy ever come to the idea of giving a girl flowers, unless he's a poet? He has no idea they might like them, because his father and mother and his friends have not said anything sexist to him along the lines of 'girls like flowers'. Now, I'm sure there's girls out there who don't like flowers, but I've known a ton that really do like them. So ladies, who do not like flowers, why not just take one for the team. Let them buy you flowers. It's not that terrible is it :shock:
Maybe it seems like a silly example, but it's the logical extension.

Madtentacle
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 10:13 pm UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby Madtentacle » Mon Mar 15, 2010 8:53 am UTC

If GeoIP turned into a flaming discussion about equality and womens rights, then what will happen to this thread?

And I laughed at this one, one of the better recently, i think.

OrangeAipom
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 2:19 am UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby OrangeAipom » Mon Mar 15, 2010 8:59 am UTC

sliverstorm wrote:
cephalopod9 wrote:Also, people need to stop with the pop psychology; trying to explain to me how men and women are just sooo different! women are emotional! they like romance novels! it makes me want to stab someone.


If men and women really are so not different, I think you've just turned me on to the biggest success of my life. What you are saying has finally bridged the gender gap! Essentially what you are saying is women, just like men, want their porn to be of naked women fixing cars!

*shuffles off to make millions*



In your retaliatory actions based on your frustration towards this pop psychology, please don't forget that men and women *are* different. K? :wink: I'm fine with us being similar, but IMHO when we whitewash things and say 'NO. SAME. HEAR ME? SAME.' we are in just as much trouble.

You do realise that the example you gave matches the one in the comic and that not all males like that kind of porn, rite?

People and people are different. I bet that some differences are more likely in one gender than another, such as muscle mass and whatnot, but I don't think you should generalise too much.us

sliverstorm
Posts: 25
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 11:10 am UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby sliverstorm » Mon Mar 15, 2010 9:04 am UTC

OrangeAipom wrote:
sliverstorm wrote:
cephalopod9 wrote:Also, people need to stop with the pop psychology; trying to explain to me how men and women are just sooo different! women are emotional! they like romance novels! it makes me want to stab someone.


If men and women really are so not different, I think you've just turned me on to the biggest success of my life. What you are saying has finally bridged the gender gap! Essentially what you are saying is women, just like men, want their porn to be of naked women fixing cars!

*shuffles off to make millions*



In your retaliatory actions based on your frustration towards this pop psychology, please don't forget that men and women *are* different. K? :wink: I'm fine with us being similar, but IMHO when we whitewash things and say 'NO. SAME. HEAR ME? SAME.' we are in just as much trouble.

You do realise that the example you gave matches the one in the comic and that not all males like that kind of porn, rite?

People and people are different. I bet that some differences are more likely in one gender than another, such as muscle mass and whatnot, but I don't think you should generalise too much.us


Aww... you missed the crux of my jest
"women want want their porn to be of naked women fixing cars!"

I was just cracking a joke there :D

Jenni Nikki
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 3:21 am UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby Jenni Nikki » Mon Mar 15, 2010 9:06 am UTC

Woopate wrote:
Jenni Nikki wrote:
Woopate: I don't buy it, but if he were speaking to a man, it would not have the same connotations anyway.



Maybe the "Get over yourself" part. The first paragraph is fairly gender neutral.


Well I was referring to the comment as a whole :) If he'd just left it at the first paragraph, there wouldn't be a problem.

MichaelKarnerfors
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 3:30 am UTC
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Re: Porn For Women

Postby MichaelKarnerfors » Mon Mar 15, 2010 9:34 am UTC

firinne wrote:
TheGrammarBolshevik wrote:Course, I'm not quite sure what it means that a male author is speaking up on behalf of women here.

Well

as a woman, I highly prefer it to male authors not speaking up on behalf of women.

As a male, I prefer to not have another male, or female, speak on behalf of me (unless I specifically ask them to).

firinne: Where did Randall say that he speaks on behalf of all women? The comic features one female character making a statement about her personal preference. What kind of logic did you use to transform that into being a statement for all women?

TheGrammarBolshevik: Would you find it more acceptable to have another woman speak for you, even if she directly contradicts your preference? Would that be more or less acceptable than having a male say "You cannot pin a singular preference onto all women and claim they all like that one"?

/Michael

Poppy Appletree
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 5:20 am UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby Poppy Appletree » Mon Mar 15, 2010 9:54 am UTC

sliverstorm wrote:I've always wondered about that. There isn't any natural child-producing attack vector that does stimulate it particularly well. (emphasis on natural. Anything contortionist-esque or requiring especially aerobic feats don't count) Kind of seems like a failure on nature's part. Course, on the other hand, as we are still alive as a species it is impossible for nature to have failed. We should broaden our horizons. Who says it was supposed to be pleasurable anyway? Shouldn't we just be glad we aren't a species of traumatic insemination? 8)

Oh god... if we were, the feminist movement and the survival of the entire fscking human race would be diametrically opposed...


A statistic of approximately one in four women being raped in their lifetime might oppose that view. :|

User avatar
Woopate
Scrapple
Posts: 503
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:34 am UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby Woopate » Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:05 am UTC

Poppy Appletree wrote:
sliverstorm wrote:I've always wondered about that. There isn't any natural child-producing attack vector that does stimulate it particularly well. (emphasis on natural. Anything contortionist-esque or requiring especially aerobic feats don't count) Kind of seems like a failure on nature's part. Course, on the other hand, as we are still alive as a species it is impossible for nature to have failed. We should broaden our horizons. Who says it was supposed to be pleasurable anyway? Shouldn't we just be glad we aren't a species of traumatic insemination? 8)

Oh god... if we were, the feminist movement and the survival of the entire fscking human race would be diametrically opposed...


A statistic of approximately one in four women being raped in their lifetime might oppose that view. :|


Raped has always meant, in my head, woman tied up or threatened with a weapon, and penetration. Sexual Assault or Harrasment would be unwanted touching. Somehow I don't think 1/4 of women have been victims of my definition of rape.

Poppy Appletree
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 5:20 am UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby Poppy Appletree » Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:11 am UTC

Woopate wrote:Raped has always meant, in my head, woman tied up or threatened with a weapon, and penetration. Sexual Assault or Harrasment would be unwanted touching. Somehow I don't think 1/4 of women have been victims of my definition of rape.


Well then, I'm going to tell you frankly and without intent to demean you in any way, that your definition of "rape" is highly inaccurate. Most rapes don't involve being tied up or threatened or whatnot, but rape does generally require penetration. Additionally, the vast majority of rapes aren't committed by strangers; they're committed by friends, acquaintances, family, family friends, people like that.

EDIT: I'll note that there is a fair amount of variance in estimates, such as estimates of about 1 in 6 in the US, but I don't think I've ever seen a statistic go to less than 1 in 10.
Last edited by Poppy Appletree on Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:20 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

Notch
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 5:52 pm UTC
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Porn For Women

Postby Notch » Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:20 am UTC

Poppy Appletree wrote:A statistic of approximately one in four women being raped in their lifetime might oppose that view. :|


Fuck, really? Source?

I feel ignorant and ashamed for humanity now.

Poppy Appletree
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 5:20 am UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby Poppy Appletree » Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:22 am UTC

Notch wrote:
Poppy Appletree wrote:A statistic of approximately one in four women being raped in their lifetime might oppose that view. :|


Fuck, really? Source?

I feel ignorant and ashamed for humanity now.


Well, I've researched it a fair bit, so I don't keep track of all the sources I see. I usually look at statistics for the UK and US, which tend to be fairly consistent - rough estimates are fairly easy to acquire by Googling, though, such as the first result for "rape statistics", which gives this.

floreal
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 7:02 pm UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby floreal » Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:25 am UTC

i must admit that i was really disappointed when i read some of the girls here finding this comic sexist...
i find it AWESOME xD i mean... just the idea that a book called "porn for women" being about guys doing housework exist makes me want to find whoever wrote it and write a letter like in this comic... i mean CHRIST... i agree on the person who said that men and women arent really THAT different in these matters... i mean ofc we are different, but really... give us a break... porn should be as far away from housework as possible....

Notch
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Dec 12, 2006 5:52 pm UTC
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Re: Porn For Women

Postby Notch » Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:30 am UTC

Poppy Appletree wrote:
Notch wrote:
Poppy Appletree wrote:A statistic of approximately one in four women being raped in their lifetime might oppose that view. :|


Fuck, really? Source?

I feel ignorant and ashamed for humanity now.


Well, I've researched it a fair bit, so I don't keep track of all the sources I see. I usually look at statistics for the UK and US, which tend to be fairly consistent - rough estimates are fairly easy to acquire by Googling, though, such as the first result for "rape statistics", which gives this.


Thank you

User avatar
LuNatic
Posts: 973
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 4:21 am UTC
Location: The land of Aus

Re: Porn For Women

Postby LuNatic » Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:43 am UTC

Mr. Burke wrote:
Gammarad wrote:'Porn for women' uses the word 'porn' to refer specifically to the concept of porn as what males want women to do but can't get them to do.

Of course, that's just silly. Most of the stuff done in porn is of the “don't do that home” variety. After all, it's done for best visuals, not most enjoyment. We like to look at it. We also like to look at people running after a round piece of dead pig or crashing a car at 250 kph into a wall.


That damned bacon, it never stands still!
Cynical Idealist wrote:
Velict wrote:Good Jehova, there are cheesegraters on the blagotube!

This is, for some reason, one of the funniest things I've read today.

User avatar
snowyowl
Posts: 464
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 7:36 pm UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby snowyowl » Mon Mar 15, 2010 11:30 am UTC

floreal wrote:i must admit that i was really disappointed when i read some of the girls here finding this comic sexist...
i find it AWESOME xD i mean... just the idea that a book called "porn for women" being about guys doing housework exist makes me want to find whoever wrote it and write a letter like in this comic...


Agreed. I don't think this comic is making a statement, feminist, chauvinist, or otherwise. I think it's just pointing out how unfunny the "Porn For Women" books are.
The preceding comment is an automated response.

User avatar
Woopate
Scrapple
Posts: 503
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:34 am UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby Woopate » Mon Mar 15, 2010 11:31 am UTC

Notch wrote:
Poppy Appletree wrote:
Notch wrote:
Poppy Appletree wrote:A statistic of approximately one in four women being raped in their lifetime might oppose that view. :|


Fuck, really? Source?

I feel ignorant and ashamed for humanity now.


Well, I've researched it a fair bit, so I don't keep track of all the sources I see. I usually look at statistics for the UK and US, which tend to be fairly consistent - rough estimates are fairly easy to acquire by Googling, though, such as the first result for "rape statistics", which gives this.


Thank you


Yeah, really. Wow. In terms of issues that need awareness raised, I think this is a biggie. When more than 10% of women given the lowest estimates suffer rape, that says to me that society as whole is educating both men and women incorrectly about sex. Actually, I think that western society as a whole has a very twisted and disfigured outlook on sex. That men and women will spend a huge amount of their time "fighting" homosexuality, but generally well-educated people have no idea how significant an issue such as rape is? Something is very, very wrong with that.

Czhorat
Posts: 365
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:28 pm UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby Czhorat » Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:01 pm UTC

floreal wrote:i must admit that i was really disappointed when i read some of the girls here finding this comic sexist...
i find it AWESOME xD i mean... just the idea that a book called "porn for women" being about guys doing housework exist makes me want to find whoever wrote it and write a letter like in this comic... i mean CHRIST... i agree on the person who said that men and women arent really THAT different in these matters... i mean ofc we are different, but really... give us a break... porn should be as far away from housework as possible....


I don't find the comic sexist, but I don't find the Porn for Women series of books as sexist as the author does either. I see it as a slightly naughty but still appropriate in mixed company joke at the expense of men who aren't willing to do housework, cooking etc. As an aside, one recent stody said that newly unemployed men spend about an extra five minutes a day on housework and two to four hours (I forget which) watching television. Given such a statistic and the aversion many men still have to what they see as "women's work", I think the joke that a woman's deepest fantasy is for that hunky guy to be ironing her shirt is at least worth a chuckle.

I did still appreciate the punchline in this comic.

User avatar
Monika
Welcoming Aarvark
Posts: 3673
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 8:03 am UTC
Location: Germany, near Heidelberg
Contact:

Re: Porn For Women

Postby Monika » Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:04 pm UTC

I like this comic very much, but I don't get the hover text at all.

Omegaton wrote:The hover text made this comic for me! Haha!

Can you or someone else enlighten me? There were no men vacuuming the bridge of Galactica ... or were there?


dookiecheese wrote:Such as the endless barrage of nearly completely bs child psychology studies showing women as better at nearly every characteristic or action that defines childhood intelligence. I quite clearly remember being handed a sheet in my high school psychology class where it listed quite thoroughly how girls developed faster, recognized various aspects of their surroundings including people faster, and remembered earlier, as well as the apparent lack of comparative progress among boys of the same age.

Boys develop a bit slower than girls. How are you gonna explain that away? How could this possibly be statistically tainted?

One just needs to be careful what conclusion to draw from this. Especially it does of course not mean that adult men are somehow less developed or less intelligent than adult women. But for example the early separation into different school types at age 10 in Germany is even more a disadvantage for boys than for girls.


IreneDAdler wrote:I really liked this comic, though I do have to agree, the punchline is in the alt-text. I hadn't heard of these books before, and when I read the comic, I thought for a minute Randall must have made that book up, because I couldn't imagine how it could possibly exist, because I couldn't imagine that many people could be functionally retarded enough to think printing something like that would be a good idea.

I also wondered first if these books really really exist. I tried to google them. I was not successful :P .


Kalos wrote:I AM RANDALL, A MAN. I KNOW EVERYTHING WOMEN WANT.

Sure he does. Women like to be entertained by high-quality webcomics and come to xkcd.com three times a week to have their secret desires fulfilled :D .
#xkcd-q on irc.foonetic.net - the LGBTIQQA support channel
Please donate to help these people

User avatar
TheSkyMovesSideways
Posts: 589
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 8:36 am UTC
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Porn For Women

Postby TheSkyMovesSideways » Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:23 pm UTC

Monika wrote:
IreneDAdler wrote:I really liked this comic, though I do have to agree, the punchline is in the alt-text. I hadn't heard of these books before, and when I read the comic, I thought for a minute Randall must have made that book up, because I couldn't imagine how it could possibly exist, because I couldn't imagine that many people could be functionally retarded enough to think printing something like that would be a good idea.

I also wondered first if these books really really exist. I tried to google them. I was not successful :P

Really?

http://www.amazon.com/Women-Cambridge-W ... 0811855511

:)
I had all kinds of plans in case of a zombie attack.
I just figured I'd be on the other side.
~ASW

Noam Samuel
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 1:50 am UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby Noam Samuel » Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:28 pm UTC

lcdrambrose wrote:I was literally just reading something about how romance novels are like porn for women (won't post the link, I don't want to be a spammer)
There were a number of good points though: they make women have unrealistic expectations of men, some women spend all of their time reading them, etc. I think the poster called it "emotional porn".


Um, apart from Twilight and its preteen ilk, most romance novels are more like "sexual porn". Y'know, with gratuitously written sex scenes and everything.

User avatar
J L
Posts: 242
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 11:03 am UTC
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Porn For Women

Postby J L » Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:37 pm UTC

phlip wrote:Original Galactica had a bridge. It's only the remake where it's all submarine-but-in-space.

But were there many longing looks on the original Galactica?

Kalos
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2008 6:45 pm UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby Kalos » Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:40 pm UTC

Monika wrote:Sure he does. Women like to be entertained by high-quality webcomics and come to xkcd.com three times a week to have their secret desires fulfilled :D .


I don't understand how I'm the only one annoyed by Randy's pseudo-feminism. Actually, every time Randy tries to make a statement it comes off as stupid and shallow, but this one is by far the worst (in recent memory). It distinctly reminds me of Murderface from Metalocalypse standing in the middle of a club yelling at the top of his lungs about how if anybody even says anything bad about a woman, he'll beat 'em up... except it's instead "RAAAGH I AM GREAT KNIGHT IN SHINING ARMOR COME TO SAVE LADIES FROM JOKES THAT ARE ACTUALLY AT THE EXPENSE OF MY OWN GENDER'S STEREOTYPES!"

Also: when Muderface did it, it was to make jokes at HIS expense, where our lovely author actually did it with a straight face.

Alzhaid
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 3:00 pm UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby Alzhaid » Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:47 pm UTC

RockoTDF wrote:
Alzhaid wrote:I can't see the image of the comic, not even from this thread... Is there any problem or our proxy is blocking the image because is too porn? :roll:


There is nothing pornographic about the comic itself. Just someone typing at a computer. Oh, and the word "fuck" is used, but I don't think your blocker bothers to do handwriting recognition.


Trying to access the .png directly, I receive the message: "The page you are trying to access cannot be visualized, because it belongs to a not allowed category: [entertainment|pornography]"

I guess it's because the png is called porn_for_women.png. I hope I won't get fired because I tried like a thousand times to load it :mrgreen:

Czhorat
Posts: 365
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:28 pm UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby Czhorat » Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:53 pm UTC

Kalos wrote:I don't understand how I'm the only one annoyed by Randy's pseudo-feminism. Actually, every time Randy tries to make a statement it comes off as stupid and shallow, but this one is by far the worst (in recent memory). It distinctly reminds me of Murderface from Metalocalypse standing in the middle of a club yelling at the top of his lungs about how if anybody even says anything bad about a woman, he'll beat 'em up... except it's instead "RAAAGH I AM GREAT KNIGHT IN SHINING ARMOR COME TO SAVE LADIES FROM JOKES THAT ARE ACTUALLY AT THE EXPENSE OF MY OWN GENDER'S STEREOTYPES!"

Also: when Muderface did it, it was to make jokes at HIS expense, where our lovely author actually did it with a straight face.


I see where you're coming from here, and you do have a fair point. I agree, and already stated on this thread, that the Porn for Women books are more about the idea that men don't do housework than that women don't like sex. I do think it's possible to read this in a light-hearted way that makes no big feminist statement but merely pokes gentle fun at the whole Porn for Women concept. That's how I took it, but your interpretation is as valid as mine and probably more so than those who see it as a feminist message.

User avatar
Chrysalis
Posts: 20
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 11:26 am UTC
Location: Europe

Re: Porn For Women

Postby Chrysalis » Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:57 pm UTC

Monika wrote:I like this comic very much, but I don't get the hover text at all.

Omegaton wrote:The hover text made this comic for me! Haha!

Can you or someone else enlighten me? There were no men vacuuming the bridge of Galactica ... or were there?


I second this, someone please explain? Does Galactica fall into the "porn for women" category, too because it has women playing significant roles for a change?
The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel.

User avatar
Mr. Burke
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2009 4:56 pm UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby Mr. Burke » Mon Mar 15, 2010 1:07 pm UTC

Noam Samuel wrote:Um, apart from Twilight and its preteen ilk, most romance novels are more like "sexual porn". Y'know, with gratuitously written sex scenes and everything.

Good old Valley of Penises.

peanutdustbomb
Posts: 20
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:41 pm UTC

Re: "Porn For Women" Discussion

Postby peanutdustbomb » Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:07 pm UTC

Edit: I'm removing all comments made in this pornography discussion. In the future, I'll remember to keep heated discussions to 4chan.
Last edited by peanutdustbomb on Tue Mar 22, 2011 11:36 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

Tucatz
Posts: 4
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:25 pm UTC

Re: "Porn For Women" Discussion

Postby Tucatz » Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:27 pm UTC

Heh. I never would have thought of myself as a female porn fantasy. I iron my own clothes, cook dinner for my family and do my own housecleaning.

So why am I still a single parent?...

peanutdustbomb
Posts: 20
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:41 pm UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby peanutdustbomb » Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:29 pm UTC

Edit: I'm removing all comments made in this pornography discussion. In the future, I'll remember to keep heated discussions to 4chan.
Last edited by peanutdustbomb on Tue Mar 22, 2011 11:36 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

smowton
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:25 pm UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby smowton » Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:33 pm UTC

BostonKaren wrote:I think both the author and a lot of the posters are missing the point: it isn't that women don't like/want sex; or that we don't enjoy porn! It's just that the thought of a man actually doing housework is so appealing as to be a HUGE turn on!


Interesting. This seems like an example of the phrase "turn on" meaning something quite different to my own (Y-chromosome-having) understanding.

My housemates are also bastards to get to do some housework, and the idea of them suddenly deciding to turn our home into an opulent palace for my enjoyment is deeply appealing. The idea of a random person showing up on the doorstep and pressing a million quid into my bemused hands is deeply appealing. Heck, the idea of negotiating world peace is deeply appealing.

To call any of these things a "turn on" however would imply they'd make good masturbation material. And that, I feel, would be wrong.

User avatar
TheGrammarBolshevik
Posts: 4878
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:12 am UTC
Location: Going to and fro in the earth, and walking up and down in it.

Re: "Porn For Women" Discussion

Postby TheGrammarBolshevik » Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:36 pm UTC

Rocko, you're imagining things. I asked "what it means that a male author is speaking up on behalf of women." There have been plenty of responses that have seemed perfectly reasonable without invoking teh sexisms. Your post, minus the "get over yourself," would be one of them. Anyone labeling this comic sexist is your own invention.

I'm more than a little amused that people assume I am a woman (or a girl) because I think that gender in comics deserves a closer look.
Nothing rhymes with orange,
Not even sporange.

LadyTam
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:37 pm UTC

Re: "Porn For Women" Discussion

Postby LadyTam » Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:41 pm UTC

I didn't even know that was a thing. O_o That is incredibly weird.

I've never quite understood the whole "guys never do housework" thing anyways; most of my male peers have been rather clean gents, and have often gotten irritated at me because, even though I'm a girl, I'm not a terribly neat person! lol

I think that whoever makes those books is very very confused.

Capt. Obvious
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 5:55 am UTC

Re: "Porn For Women" Discussion

Postby Capt. Obvious » Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:45 pm UTC

I always found that the statement "porn for" never referred to actual porn. For instance, Inglorious Bastards was accurately described as "porn for Jews".
Spoiler:
A hot Jewish girl kills Hitler et al. America cared about the plight of European Jews. Lots of "wish it were true" moments.


I use "porn for" to reflect any desirable but unlikely circumstance. Anyone's significant other cheerfully doing domestic chores seems to fall in that category.

On the other hand, I've never heard the phrase "porn for" used to actually refer to porn. "Porn for MILF lovers" is usually called by the far more convenient title "MILF porn".

yet another steven
Posts: 47
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 10:22 am UTC

Re: "Porn For Women" Discussion

Postby yet another steven » Mon Mar 15, 2010 2:59 pm UTC

Wow, this got heated pretty quickly...

EDIT: I moved the post below to the porn thread, where I figured it would be more comfy.

Anyway, here is my list of turnoffs in real porn:
1. the sound. Either it is turned off or I'm turned off. That horrible fake moaning - blech.
2. fake boobs, piercings, tattoos (and other self destructive shit)
3. fake nails! aarch!
4. when it looks as if the actors are trying to kill something
5. lack of respect towards women ("slut", "milf", ...). Let's be grateful they're willing to do these wild things for us ok?
6. extremely superficial buildup (in most cases it would be better not to have a story at all)
7. shaved genitals are ok I suppose, but they're way overrepresented. People don't need mods, okay?

In my ideal porn, there is real (or at least real-looking) affection, in the sense that the actors/actresses look as if they're actually trying to please one another. Actors/actresses should also appear to (a) feel safe, (b) have self respect and a personality and (c) enjoy what they're doing. Finally I'd welcome a sense of mystery and/or discovery. All this without reverting to softcore of course.

My questions:
1. Why do these issues seem to be worst in modern American porn? (Actually, Asian stuff can also be pretty bad in terms of violent and disrespectful attitudes). What's up with you guys?
2. It's often suggested that women dislike the kind of crap I listed above while men don't care. This can't be true, can it? I feel like a quite regular guy but most porn creeps me out for the reasons I gave above. Which brings me to the following:
3. Do consumers really have no taste, or do the producers only *think* consumers have no taste, or is it just that since the porn industry is not well respected, it's usually the seediest people who end up in the business? (When my wife and I decided to buy a vibrator it struck us how the market was dominated by hopelessly ugly and bad quality products; it's only since recently that some companies have started to produce nice looking stuff. There is clearly quite a large market for that.)
Last edited by yet another steven on Tue Mar 23, 2010 8:26 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

nahkaimurrao
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 5:18 pm UTC

Re: Porn For Women

Postby nahkaimurrao » Mon Mar 15, 2010 3:23 pm UTC

BlueNight wrote:The difference between men and women is quantifiable. Whereas (most) men live in a world of material things and tasks to be performed, (most) women see such things as secondary to relationships and experiences. Thus, a man would find it stimulating for a random woman to randomly come up to him and initiate sexual acts, while a woman finds it stimulating for she and a man to build a relationship (no matter how basic), and as the culmination, perform those same acts.

(What I said above is a basic formulation not taking into account statistical outliers.)


Quite glad you added that last clarifying statement, other wise I would have had to completely disagree. My own personal experiences would turn this stereotype on its head as most of the females I know tend to be more aggressive / sexual / dominant than the males. (Seriously, don't get too many of these girls together in one room or things will get dangerous, let me tell you!) Personally, my opinion is that there is no significant difference between men/ women regarding this subject. However, It is also possible my whole frame of reference is one of those outliers.

CrayolaTwo
Posts: 31
Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 6:05 pm UTC

Re: "Porn For Women" Discussion

Postby CrayolaTwo » Mon Mar 15, 2010 3:25 pm UTC

LuNatic wrote:Wait, so the best way to attract a girl is to offer to wash her dishes?

So tempting to post an image of 'The Todd' from Scrubs...


*shrug* Hey, I wouldn't turn it down!

As a woman, I'm not offended by Porn for Women. I mean, I'm not gonna buy the books, but they don't bother me. They're stupid little jokes and I've been around internet culture enough that when I see "porn for ____", I don't automatically think "people are actually going to masturbate to this". Usually it's more like "things people are interested in".

Despite my "meh" attitude towards the book, I'm also not offended by Randall making this comic. I think that it's nice when people stand up for everyone being treated as equal, even (and maybe especially) when they're not a member of the oppressed group.

But yeah, the joke was totally in the alt-text. Fanfiction = porn for women. People fuck in it. (Also, please do not take this statement to mean that I believe that fanfiction is sufficient porn for all you porny women out there. :wink: Just covering my bases.)


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BlitzGirl and 107 guests