In the "Child-Proof" thread, the following (excerpted) exchange took place...

Mark: I like scantily-clad women as much as the next guy, but my question is, should commercials have the same rating as the show that airs them? For instance, say I'm watching the NFL playoffs and then a beer commercial comes on with the women mud-wrestling or behaving in a very suggestive or overly sexual manner. I suddenly have to worry about what my son will say.

Wertz: I've never seen these mud-wrestling ads, though. Do they have any with two guys - or do we have to wait for, like, the Tony Awards for those?

cyclone: Incidentally, I guess there have been all sorts of objections lodged with Miller Brewing Company about that mud-wrestling commercial previously mentioned. Apparently, the complainers found it offensive (consider that the vast majority of those objecting were married women over 40--I don't think too many guys had a problem with the ads).

Wertz: Also incidentally, I'll bet if they did show the Tony Awards version, half those women would have no complaint.


Now: Was that a ridiculously sexist remark on my part? Are women as easily sold by images of ripped young studs with their shirts off as men are by those "scantily-clad women" for whom Mark has expressed a certain fondness?

To extend the question - and revisit an issue which was once a hallmark of feminism - how do women today feel about pornography? Traditionally, many women have argued against pornography on the grounds that it exploits women - and the same, I suppose, could be said of ads which try to sell beer through mud-wrestling females.

A case could possibly be made for heterosexual porn, but where, then, do women stand on gay porngraphy? Most of the straight women I know who have seen gay pornography (and I'm afraid I've introduced more than a few female friends to this underrated genre over the years) have LOVED it - perhaps more than men seem to enjoy lesbian sequences in "straight" porn. Those who criticize porno films on the basis of exploitation have sometimes been a bit stimied by all-male-cast videos ("It's men exploiting... uh, well... other men").

I have nothing specific to debate here: just curious as to where the women of the forum stand. Are you opposed to pornography? If so, why? And, if so, would the same reasons apply to gay (male) pornography? Are ads like the mud-wrestling Miller ad better than outright pornography in that they're less explicit - or worse, in that they're selling something other than the skills of the mudwrestlers and are, therefore, more exploitative? Would mud-wrestling men help sell you a product? Or do such prurient tactics really only work on men?

I realize that these are a number of diverse, if vaguely related, questions and am quite willing to allow this thread to meander a bit.

I am not opposed to pornography, but for my personal viewing pleasure, I am very choosy. I'm not exactly sure how to explain it, but I look for artistic value, interesting costumes and sets, and people who are more natural. I guess I look for sensuality as opposed to sexuality if that makes any sense. I am very turned off by most pornography, especially the "money shot," because I personally find it degrading. I realize that there are others who appreciate it though, and since it is all consensual, I would never suggest that someone else not watch it. I think there is a market out there for a wider range of styles, though, and I do think that more women would watch pornography if there were more products that were geared towards their tastes.



I have no problems with gay (male) pornography.



Hmmm...interesting question. I guess I just don't really get offended by it. Being attracted, sexually, is natural, and it makes sense that Miller would use women to attract men to their products. I think that one potential problem with advertising, pornography, and other forms of media is that it can promote an urealistic expectation of what people are "supposed" to be like. This goes beyond the realm of sexuality in media, though.



It wouldn't help to sell a product to me, personally. No.

The adult film industry is worth billions, and invariably, the highest rated shows on television are also the most explicit. There are many companies that use male models as a seller for their products, as well. I remember a few years ago there was a gentlemen who was all the rage with the ladies when he took his "Diet Coke break". Sex appeal is a tool that sells product, and that is how companies view it. Ever seen the big muscle hunks in those 'Secret' deodorant commercials? I think sexual exploitation for profit is hardly limited to women, whether you refer to pornography, or ads/shows on television.

If advertising or pornography promoted a REALISTIC expectation of what people are supposed to be like, nobody would watch it. That's why the most grotesque people in society don't show up in advertising--nobody wants to look at them. I noticed this recently, as I was paying special attention to all the fast food commercials on t.v. (which, amazingly, is about every third commercial): all the people filling their faces with KFC and BK Whoppers are fit and attractive. Meanwhile, most of the people actually eating at KFC and BK are lardos. And if pornography promoted realism, porno movies would probably be a lot shorter (though the plots might be improved).

Just to clarify, I wasn't just limiting that comment to advertising and pornography. I was speaking of the media as a whole, including television, movies, etc, which probably should be in a different thread, but it relates to pornography and advertising, in the sense that it is one of the negative aspects that I can see. My point was more to say that the negative aspects that I see in porn and advertising are not limited to those genres. It is more of a societal thing.

Additionally, I disagree with you when you say that no one would watch porn or advertising if there were real people involved. There is a market for amateur porn, because some people are not attracted to women who are implanted, bleached, and painted. There is certainly a market for both. This is evident in television, also. Look at Roseanne. That show was full of real people, and it was an incredible success. I'm not saying that all shows should depict reality. As I said before, I tend to be drawn more towards theatrical sets and elaborate costuming and make-up, which is definitely not reality. It's playing on a fantasy, but too much fantasy can tend to distort your vision of reality.

Yeah - what is it about women in most commercial straight porn? Do most heterosexual men really go for women with nails that long, hair that big, lips that red, and heels that high? Do women feel that these accoutrements make them more attractive? Do they make them more attractive?? I don't think so - but I'm speaking more from an aesthetic point of view than a prurient point of view...

I am thinking about one particular local ad on tv here which is done by a car dealership for those really expensive foreign power cars - like a Jaguar or something (I think that's it).

In the ad there's this slinky young (about 19 or so) woman, in a dress that was painted on. She is leaning over the car in a very suggestive and utterly unnatural way (she really twisted her bod to accomplish this pose - believe me I am a ballet teacher )

She never says anything, just stands there all twisted up and lowering her eyes to half mast (as Anne Rice would say - speaking of pornography). The announcer's voice does the spiel.

Anyway, when I see that ad I ask myself, since the ad is pretty obviously aimed at the male viewer, do men really go out and spend a gazillion dollars on a car because this female is bending over it? He surely realizes she doesn't come with the car.

Or does he think he will attract females with a car? So I could turn the question around and say do men feel exploited when Madison Avenue assumes that a twisty-bod woman will sell them a car?

Meanwhile - back to the topic.....I have to say that I have never purposefully watched pornography. I have seen some accidentally - like a quick advertisement - or a magazine that I happened to walk by that was lying open on the sidewalk. My personal opinion is that it's not for me. However, if it doesn't include children, and is done by adults who are consenting (the women are not coerced) then it's legal and I just sigh and accept it as part of world.

I think that advertising, like the one mentioned by Basheva, are used to push products to Men, because they are absolutely correct in thinking that Men are primarily motivated by their sexual urges. I think Men really do consider, when they are buying a new sports car, that this car will increase their chances of picking up women. Of course, the kind of woman that would have sex with a man based on the car he drives, sets women's liberation back a little; but we all know that women like this exist. . .and so do the advertisers.
As far as pornography in general is considered, I don't really have a problem with it as long as it does not portray any unwilling participants.

-Kisov