appreciating nonconsensual sex as fantasy
One of my all-time favorite porn videos is an animation of a hunky young superhero who has been immobilized by tentacles, more tentacles then comprehensively rape him. Tentacles sucking his nipples, stroking his cock, fucking his ass -- I wish they were also fucking his throat. Despite himself, he enjoys the assault and cums and afterward becomes submissive to the tentacle monster.
A moment ago I was reading a review of a queer videogame, and it referred to criticisms thrown at the game for scenes that involved nonconsensual sex. Sigh.
We all know that rape and sexual assault exist, and nowadays it is even illegal to rape your wife, which was generally not prohibited in the past. I've done the math and practically every human alive today is a descendant of a child conceived via rape. For this reason I've referred to our species as homo rapiens.
And I think rape should be illegal. Even though nearly all of us have rapists' DNA.
Yet, I have these fantasies of nonconsensual sex. And my actual sex life is organized around submission to a dominant, who holds the key to my locked cock. My cock is locked right now. I don't know when it will be unlocked again.
I enjoy, if that's the right word, being spanked and otherwise subjected to pain, as part of a sexual encounter.
Should I repress these fantasies and activities, because some people experience actual unwanted sexual assault? Am I glorifying rape?
I have another porn video I like, a young man has been tied down to a bed, and his tormentor strokes his cock until it gets hard and then he's begging to cum. Is it wrong to watch this? In reality, he's being paid, and has consented, but the portrayal is that he hasn't consented, instead he's being shown that he'd actually enjoy gay sex if he'd let go and let it happen.
When this portrayal isn't gendered, isn't showing men assuming women want to have sex despite saying no, when it is man-on-man -- is it better? It accesses this internal homophobia, that many men who presume themselves to be straight would actually enjoy gay sex if they'd let it happen. It subverts cultural conditioning. But is it similar for straight people, that many women who presume themselves to be virginous would actually enjoy fucking if they'd let it happen?
I know that some women also fantasize about nonconsensual sex. The trick is --> the person fantasizing actually wants it to happen. There's a cultural subversion happening, that the subject has been taught to say "no" but actually wants it. The lack of consent is societal, not personal. A battle between superego and id.
This is something that exists -- a societal teaching that sex is bad, layered over an internal yearning for sex.
At least regarding the porn I watch, if the subject didn't actually want it, didn't actually enjoy it, then neither would I. I'm not into brazenly sadistic porn, or brazenly sadistic scenes in person either.
But some people are. There's porn that is frankly sadistically rapist. Porn in which the subject does not enjoy it, and that's the point.
And if just porn, is this OK? Maybe we have drives, via our historic DNA, to rape others, but watching this substitutes for reality and allows us to satiate this drive without a victim.
When it comes to children, however, we draw the line on porn, kiddy porn sends you to jail. But not if no actual children were involved. If it is animated child porn, you're free. Textual child porn, you're free. Perhaps for the same reason, that fictional child porn substitutes for reality and allows people to satiate their drive without an actual child victim.
Is this really how sex drives work, that you need to satiate them, and that a fictional portrayal does the trick and saves others from actual rape? Or does the porn create drives that were not intrinsic?
From a very early age I found stories of bondage and torture between men, and was sexually aroused, even if nonconsensual. Especially if nonconsensual? I think this drive is innate. Homo rapiens. But in real life I do my best to engage only in consensual sex. The drive is there, nonetheless. A two-way drive, to desire taking and being taken.
[Obvi never running for public office when I write shit like this LOL]
A moment ago I was reading a review of a queer videogame, and it referred to criticisms thrown at the game for scenes that involved nonconsensual sex. Sigh.
We all know that rape and sexual assault exist, and nowadays it is even illegal to rape your wife, which was generally not prohibited in the past. I've done the math and practically every human alive today is a descendant of a child conceived via rape. For this reason I've referred to our species as homo rapiens.
And I think rape should be illegal. Even though nearly all of us have rapists' DNA.
Yet, I have these fantasies of nonconsensual sex. And my actual sex life is organized around submission to a dominant, who holds the key to my locked cock. My cock is locked right now. I don't know when it will be unlocked again.
I enjoy, if that's the right word, being spanked and otherwise subjected to pain, as part of a sexual encounter.
Should I repress these fantasies and activities, because some people experience actual unwanted sexual assault? Am I glorifying rape?
I have another porn video I like, a young man has been tied down to a bed, and his tormentor strokes his cock until it gets hard and then he's begging to cum. Is it wrong to watch this? In reality, he's being paid, and has consented, but the portrayal is that he hasn't consented, instead he's being shown that he'd actually enjoy gay sex if he'd let go and let it happen.
When this portrayal isn't gendered, isn't showing men assuming women want to have sex despite saying no, when it is man-on-man -- is it better? It accesses this internal homophobia, that many men who presume themselves to be straight would actually enjoy gay sex if they'd let it happen. It subverts cultural conditioning. But is it similar for straight people, that many women who presume themselves to be virginous would actually enjoy fucking if they'd let it happen?
I know that some women also fantasize about nonconsensual sex. The trick is --> the person fantasizing actually wants it to happen. There's a cultural subversion happening, that the subject has been taught to say "no" but actually wants it. The lack of consent is societal, not personal. A battle between superego and id.
This is something that exists -- a societal teaching that sex is bad, layered over an internal yearning for sex.
At least regarding the porn I watch, if the subject didn't actually want it, didn't actually enjoy it, then neither would I. I'm not into brazenly sadistic porn, or brazenly sadistic scenes in person either.
But some people are. There's porn that is frankly sadistically rapist. Porn in which the subject does not enjoy it, and that's the point.
And if just porn, is this OK? Maybe we have drives, via our historic DNA, to rape others, but watching this substitutes for reality and allows us to satiate this drive without a victim.
When it comes to children, however, we draw the line on porn, kiddy porn sends you to jail. But not if no actual children were involved. If it is animated child porn, you're free. Textual child porn, you're free. Perhaps for the same reason, that fictional child porn substitutes for reality and allows people to satiate their drive without an actual child victim.
Is this really how sex drives work, that you need to satiate them, and that a fictional portrayal does the trick and saves others from actual rape? Or does the porn create drives that were not intrinsic?
From a very early age I found stories of bondage and torture between men, and was sexually aroused, even if nonconsensual. Especially if nonconsensual? I think this drive is innate. Homo rapiens. But in real life I do my best to engage only in consensual sex. The drive is there, nonetheless. A two-way drive, to desire taking and being taken.
[Obvi never running for public office when I write shit like this LOL]