To be honest, It's probably not "natural", but then neither is living in a house, or going to a school or a job, etc. We're humans. We've supposedly evolved beyond the need to be "natural" and make up our own stuff as we go on.

I apoligize for the rant.

[Link]

Point is, human beings now live twice as long. Evolution hasn't caught up to our technology. We're designed to mate young, then die young. Within the last hundred years our lifespan has nearly doubled, and yet we're still wired for a shorter time table. I think that's one reason why a man's eye starts to wander when his children start getting older. It's instinct. The human male primate has finished his pre-programmed job, and he seeks to start a new one with another fertile female. Meantime, the menopausal female is naturally starting to wind down, nature's mission for her accomplished. She may lose interest in mating all together, or she might go nuts and fuck everything that moves due to increased testosterone and freedom from child-rearing.

Edited by - Pagoda on 6/24/2006 7:23:39 PM

[Link]

Suffice to say, humans will continue going on doing whatever, culture will change to the point that if everything is here in a hundred years to a point where it will be unrecognizable.

Personally, I would say monogamy is neither natural nor un-natural, but societal.

Of course, opinions will vary.
Do what works.
Be happy.

[Link]

I don't know if, for me, porn is necessary for monogamy. It may make it easier though. As Jimmy Carter said in the '76 election (opponent tried to create scandal by pointing out Carter had Playboy subscription), he too has committed adultry in his heart. Though in his mind or imagination might have been better wording. Just something to fantasize about, with out real intent.

[Link]

Wanting to watch porn is one thing; though if she's convinced herself that you find her inadequate in any way, you may have a devil of a time convincing her otherwise.
But saying that without porn you'd be screwing around, how is she to take that as anything but a clear indication that you do indeed find her inadequate.

And posting it on a public internet board, however anonymous, is not exactly the greatest confidence builder; although admittedly, doing it in a group of friends and neighbours would likely be considerably worse.

If talking it over with relative strangers is helpful and/or cathartic, by all means, if you know of a willing confidant you think won't spill any unfortunate beans, go ahead and correspond with them.

Naturally I can't know your situation, and it really isn't any of my business anyway.
But if I had a wife and she made no bones about her deep and meaningful lust for some porn- or mainstream-actor, that would not be any problem at all.
If she wanted to turn out the lights and call me Ron Jeremy that might seem odd at first, but what the heck: if it made her happy; I in turn might shout "Oh yeah, unidentified hottie in that five year old amkingdom.com pictorial" as I was unloading.
But , if she told me that, if she didn't have those movies of Ron sweating away to get herself off with, she'd be taking her love to town, that would most definitely not be pleasant news; and letting the whole world know would kinda be adding insult to injury.

Just my €0.02.

[Link]

I certainly don't know the specifics, but it seems that Mr. and Mrs. Bob are on separate pages at this point in their lengthy marriage, and that they've found and uneasy peace with the issue of porn. I sounds like it allows Bob to indulge in his fantasies somewhat without Mrs. Bob having to grow or change, which she sounds reluctant to do. Of course, my assumption is colored by my own experience, so I could be completely wrong. If that's the case, my apologies.

In my case, porn opened up a world of sexuality to which I'd previously been unaware. I'd have never known that my comfort zone was somewhat submissive had I not seen Manuel Ferrara rough up a girl in a porno and suddenly realize that I thought that was incredibly hot. My husband and I would've continued with our luke-warm sex life had it not been for my exposure to pornography. He'd never have grabbed me by my hair or pinned me down or spanked me had I not asked him to. I'd have never known to ask had I not seen it on a DVD. Who knows what would've happened had we not gotten our sexual act together and finally perfected that aspect of our marriage?

It's my experience that, when the sex in a marriage is good, sex is only a minor issue. When the sex in a marriage is unsatisfying for one or both partners, it's a major, major issue, and the crux of 90% of all tension about all things. It colors everything. This is why it's so important to get it right and to work to find middle ground between partners. At least, that's my story (and I'm sticking to it).

[Link]

Even if it's a fairly limited group of people who are likely to respond to a thread in Sex Talk, ADT is still a publicly accessible forum; and even if you delete a post, Google and/or The Wayback Machine may have archived your message in the mean time.

[Link]

I'm a great believer in a fantasy life. I think people need a fantasy life (sexual and non-sexual--and to varying degrees depending on the person) to be mentally healthy. You don't necessarily need or even want to have the fantasies come true in real life. But you need to vent feelings, dreams, frustrations, anxieties.

I think some people need porn to fuel sex fantasies, and let them vent their interests in promiscuity, different acts, etc. It's a safe release.

It wouldn't surprise me a bit if some people found that release is enough to keep them from venting in other ways, like sleeping around...

[Link]

"Vegetarianism for me is about saying ‘yes’ to things - even meat." - Coupling

[Link]

If you're referring to certain to physical qualities (e.g., pretzel like-positions or circus acts), then no -- I don't think about real sex in those terms. If you mean the sheer intensity of passionate encounter sometimes enacted by performers (whether or not actually experienced by them) and realized by porn directors, that I believe in because at times I've experienced it.

Would more intense sex make monogamy easier? By relieving certain feelings of deprivation -- yes, I think so. Would I still need porn as a means of safe release, as a pressure valve, in the way and for the reasons that jayo so eloquently articulated, yes to that also.

[Link]

And yes, we've been married for a long time -- 17+ years --and have many huge pluses in our relationship (love, friendship, admiration, shared values, shared interests, shared sense of humor, devotion to our children and the enjoyment parenting them together). I continue to "choose into" our marriage despite it's minuses for me, as does she despite its minuses for her -- which is to say, neither one of us is a victim.

[Link]

I asked Mick if we could just have sport sex; make it a recreational activity. If the kids are suddenly asleep earlier than expected, why can't we turn to each other and say, "Let's fuck. Take off your pants." Trying to make it into a special night of lovemaking each time was too much pressure. I found it easier to avoid intimacy altogether, or to be otherwise occupied until he lost interest. Well... eventually he did lose interest, as did I.

But since we've lightened up and started viewing sex (most days) as a fun diversion; a goofy romp in which we can laugh and joke around, things have gotten way better. And you'd be surprised how often the silly games turn on a dime into genuine heated passion. A "quickie" can turn into a lengthy night of lovemaking when least expected. In fact, not expecting it just might be what allows it to happen.

[Link]

Voluntary accountability - peanut butter and jelly rolls off the tongue a little easier.

[Link]

I don't watch porn to "enable" my monogamy, and I don't justify my porn-watching that way, either to my wife or to myself. I watch porn because I like it, I'm never going to stop liking it, and I don't feel that my liking it requires any justification. I used to feel that it did, but thankfully I've grown out of that. I've also grown out of the feeling that my wife is wrong not to like porn, although I'd be happier if she did.

Marriage is so fucking complex . . .

[Link]

Goes the same for me and my wife..it doesn't always have to be roses...sometimes its just about the need to fuck and cum and thats a good thing!

[Link]

But what we took away from the idea has been priceless. We started treating sex, as Pagoda said, as more of a sport or leisure activity rather than some big event. While our actual sex life probably hasn't increased a whole lot, the simple shift in ideology has made our life and relationship a lot less stressful.

And while my wife still has a moral argument with most porn as related here in ADT, the ability to treat sex in a more relaxed manner has opened up a lot of doors for discussion, erotica, toys, etc. In short making sex a whole lot more fun for the both of us.

I think that this the greatest impact of porn on monogamy. Moving sex out of the stressful and forbidden bedroom realm of procreation and into a practical and enjoyable relationship experience by (dare I say it) down-playing its importance.

[Link]

Edited by - Matt47 on 7/14/2006 12:58:09 PM

[Link]

I like the idea that porn can loosen one up, or serve as an educational tool of a sort. I see porn as the only venue through which humans can see "real" sex on a regular basis. Apart from being a peeping tom or tomasina, where else can you readily observe sex?

People can debate about the "reality" of porn sex, but it's more real than mainstream movie sex, where everything is obscured and hidden and alluded to, as opposed to shown under bright lights, with no script and only the people involved deciding what they'll do. I think porn is to sexuality as televised sports is to exercise. A heightened version, but the same elements. But no one says "sports on TV aren't real!" Generally, we look at pro sports as the positive ultimate of physicality.

Regarding the "naturalness" of monogamy...I disagreed with the person who said that monogamy was natural, in a tone that implied that polygamy (-amory) was not natural. I think that *both* are natural, in that they both have existed in humanity since humanity existed. But in recent human history, we haven't had the option of living in a larger society in which polyamory is an institutrionally-supported option. (Those institutions being church and state).

BUT!

There are subcultures in which polyamory is at least an expected option. In western gay and lesbian culture, for example, monogamy is not a mandate. Instead of assuming monogamy, gay/lesbian couples often discuss *whether* they'll be monogamous, and how they'll negotiate that aspect if they decide to have an open relationship.

But I almost hate discussions about sex and evolution because 1) evolution is still a theory and 2) because it's a theory, people use it to justify anything. People have used pop evolution to justify polyamory as a survival mechanism too, saying "men have a primal need to spread their seed as widely as possible to ensure passing on their genes" or "women will not be loyal to one man if a more alpha male comes along guaranteeing healthier offspring or stronger security."

One could posit that in pre-historic times, since we lived more communally, it didn't matter who the daddy was because the whole village helped raised the child, and the daddy could be eaten by a lion at anytime anyway.

One could posit that in the days of communal living, sharing of property and responsibilities extended to sharing of each other's bodies. We know that to this day, there are cultures that don't believe in individual land ownership..why wouldn't that extend to love partners?

But these are all postulates.

What is love and marriage, in its essence? Could it be that it's just a way to promise that someone will always be around to help me when I need it? Could it be that in our current human epoch, marriage has taken on an *increased* importance because we no longer live communally and cannot depend on the community to care for us when we are sick or aged? Do we live too individually to expect more than one person to devote their lives to helping us?

I'm down with what Bob is telling us about his marriage. It seems to me that no two people can fulfill each other's needs 100%. e.g., No husband can give a wife what her father gave her; no wife can give a husband what his mother gave him. We all fulfill our life needs with various people: with friends, family, coworkers, fellow congregants, etc. And we all fulfill life needs with various non-human objects: books, hobbies, exercise, vibrators, etc. I personally believe that it is possible to be in a "monogamous" relationship and still fulfill sexual needs with people or objects outside that relationship.

Shout out to Pagoda, who I can tell has been watching Dr. Phil. I see you, baby!

"Fashion modelling eliminates womanhood. Porn modelling exagerrates womanhood."

[Link]

Great post, BustdownGal! Welcome to the ADT Message Board and please stick around.

[Link]

Shared porn was a bonus for me in a relationship ... Had good results. Had good results with several different women. Had some girlfriends who weren't into it or were really scared of it. Just depends ... I'd be happier with someone open-minded. But anyone who meets me now will probably have an idea pretty quick, so it's really NOT an issue, though it probably IS a filter. I mean, I think the perfect woman is probably Holly Randall.

[Link]

porn is fiction, non-fiction, fantasy, escapism, education (in a way), to its audience. most things in this media-friendly world supply us with this kind of pacification/enlightenment. most people, if not all, need to think outside themselves sometimes to cope with their lives. freud suggests struggles between the id, the ego and the superego, or whatever, but call it what you will.

some people read the newspaper to get a sense of objectivity about the world and get outside themselves. some people read a spy novel to learn/escape/tune out. porn is just a different form of media, the difference being that the focus is sex.

media is the mainline to vicarious experience. you watch porn to satisfy your lust. it's natural. on the other hand, you want to stay in a relationship for security, companionship, and physical experience. it's not so much a matter of having your cake and eating it too, which it may be construed as, it's just another facet of vicarious experience.

postscript: i'm tired and this post seems like bullshit to me. disregard if you think so too.

[an old man dies, a little girl lives. fair trade.]

[Link]

The etymology of the word literally means monos "single, alone" + gamos "marriage." Taking the literal version of "One Marriage" the above quote could be accurate, but to me it has a more significant meaning more like "One Partner." Think "Common-Law" marriage. So to me monogamous can leave room for sexual satisfaction with other objects (toys and such) but not other people.

[Link]

(I am SO kidding it's not even funny.)

Edited by - mynewhobby on 8/7/2006 6:01:08 PM

[Link]

Not every culture equates marriage and monogamy. Yes, monogamy means "one spouse", but what you do with that spouse is not built into the etymology.

Some people consider any sexual thought toward an outsider to be a breach of monogamy. Some people consider it monogamy if you have a household with me, and never bring your bathhouse lovers to the house.

And some people think porn is a breach of monogamy. I don't.

As I alluded to earlier, I believe that one can fulfill sexual needs outside your primary relationship, and still be monogamous. Be it with porn, or prostitutes, or bathhouse boys or flings outside the city. If my partner and I are the kind of people who can be primary to one another while still having sex with others, then I count that as monogamous.

Just like loving others besides your spouse (eg family and friend) can be included in monogamy, so can lusting others.

[Link]

The only thing that keep me monogamous is trust. It's a powerful and wonderful thing. Once gone, it can never truly be regained. Things can be forgiven, but never forgotten. There's no pussy on the planet worth losing it over.

Porn both makes me conscious of what I'm "missing" and reminds me that I really ain't missing much. As someone else said, it's what's between a woman's ears that makes her special, and under the right circumstances fucking actually takes a backseat to caring more about someone else's happiness and well-being than your own. Blew my mind. Still does.

I could jerk off happily to the images in my own head until the end of time and never miss porn. Porn only "reminds me" that there exist women whose corporeal form stimulates me in a visceral way that I may have forgotten I was attracted to: long and lean, or short and plump-bottomed, or sparkling eyed and innocent, or wry and knowing, or some combination thereof. Variety may be the spice of life, but put too much salt in the soup and it's ruined.

What would Bob have done fifty years ago, or even twenty years ago, when porn was not so easily accessible and affordable? Would he be fucking around, or what?

[Link]

[who you tryin' ta get crazy with, ese? donchu know i'm loco?]

[Link]