Dan Savage is the best Gay Friend a straight guy ever had.

[Huckleman2000]

From his Savage Love column:

Some women like porn and some women don't mind it. For us women who are otherwise GGG but feel like vomiting at the thought of porn, telling us to use porn—or eat cupcakes—will neither relieve the pain caused by our partners' use of porn nor meet our emotional and sexual needs if we decide to opt out of relationships with men entirely. I've tried my whole life to feel okay about porn. I don't. I feel betrayed just the same as if the cheating were "real."

Never Okaying Porn Ever

Porn isn't cheating, NOPE—but let's not argue about that.

Instead, let me just say this: You shouldn't give up on men, NOPE, because I occasionally get letters from men who think a fag sex columnist is interested in hearing them repeat what the insecure, controlling women in their lives have trained them to say ("There are men out there who don't use porn, and I am one of them!"). If you hang in there long enough, PORN, you'll meet either a guy who honestly doesn't watch porn or a guy who says all the right things ("There are men out there who don't use porn, and I am one of them!") and is conscientious about clearing his browser history.

 

[bronzeage]

What is a GGG?

I think any woman with a "Never Okaying Porn Ever" policy will have a problem finding a satisfying relationship with a man.

The porn is not the problem, and a man who doesn't use porn (whatever that means) is not the solution.

It sounds like she wants a man who never masturbates. I am sure there are men like this, but a man that is not excited by his own touch, probably has no interest in hers either.

 

[Huckleman2000]

GGG = Good, Giving, and Game.

Dan Savage and his readers often use the abbreviation GGG. In his March 1, 2007 column,[10] Savage summarized: "GGG stands for 'good, giving, and game,' which is what we should all strive to be for our sex partners. Think 'good in bed,' 'giving equal time and equal pleasure,' and 'game for anything—within reason.'"
[edit]

 

[Stella_Omega]

I know a few women who would insist taht they are GGG. The problem is that last G Game for anything (within reason).

What they feel is reasonable just doesn't match up to even the most vanilla norms.

But "reasonable," they insist, is a quantifiable value, rather like amicus and his "morality." The world is out of step, not they.

it's sad, because people like this are often everything... else... one could want in a partner.

 

[bronzeage]

I know a few women who would insist taht they are GGG. The problem is that last G Game for anything (within reason).

What they feel is reasonable just doesn't match up to even the most vanilla norms.

But "reasonable," they insist, is a quantifiable value, rather like amicus and his "morality." The world is out of step, not they.

it's sad, because people like this are often everything... else... one could want in a partner.

Good, giving and game? That sounds like the bare minimum to me and not a real selling point. It's like trying to sell a house by pointing out that all the toilets flush.

Standards like GGG always seem to be mentioned only when someone has crossed the line.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Good, giving and game? That sounds like the bare minimum to me and not a real selling point. It's like trying to sell a house by pointing out that all the toilets flush.

Standards like GGG always seem to be mentioned only when someone has crossed the line.

yeah, its a standard of reasonable expectations.

 

[Loring2]

Ok

yeah, its a standard of reasonable expectations.

You're right of course Stel but who gets to define the Gs?

 

[Huckleman2000]

You're right of course Stel but who gets to define the Gs?

Well, that would be the couple themselves, wouldn't it? I think Stella's point (and Dan's) was that often people think they're GGG, when they aren't. As Dan pointed out in the OP, the woman's porn-hysteria seems more a function of her own desire to control her man's attention, presumably borne out of her own insecurity. Her definition of "game" happens to exclude the vast majority of males - that suggests that she is the aberrant one, yet she projects that onto her potential mates.

 

[Stella_Omega]

I am not even going to say that she's "aberrant." Fifteen years ago? She wouldn't be having this big of a conflict with societal norms, porn wasn't available the way it is now.

I certainly am going to agree that she's extremely limited in her mate choices, in this new culture.

On the other hand, I bet she'll find herself a mate via the internet, too. It's a genuine salvation for the niche people.

 

[Huckleman2000]

I am not even going to say that she's "aberrant." Fifteen years ago? She wouldn't be having this big of a conflict with societal norms, porn wasn't available the way it is now. [...]

Yes, "aberrant" isn't a good word - I chose it because it also seems to capture this woman's view of men who watch porn. Hence, the thread title.

Here's the post the woman is referring to, about "cupcakes" (with a shout-out to a "female porn" site):

Ever since hearing you say on your podcast that all men use porn, I have had a burning question: What about us women? If all men get a pass to have this whole other sex life, which is (mostly) external to their partnerships and is sexually satisfying, then all women should have a pass as well. Ideally, it would be a pass to enjoy something universally arousing to all women, something that would sexually satisfy us, but it wouldn't be something that turns most men on, perhaps it might even repulse them. If there were something that met my criteria, I wonder how it would play out in our relationships? Also, I am not sure what it could be, as women are a little bit more complicated.

Desires Erotic Balance

Something women enjoy but men do not... something erotic... something that repulses most men...

Cupcakes?

The now-ubiquitous cupcake isn't explicitly sexual, I realize, but our culture does encourage people—women in particular—to sublimate their erotic desires by stuffing their faces with food. And most of those squat, round, and pink-frosted things look, to my jaded eyes, like so many squat little cocks, DEB, so many growers-not-showers with pink sprinkles, and most of those cupcocks are inhaled by women. So, cupcakes.

But if cupcakes don't do it for you, DEB, then how about a free pass to enjoy, eyedunno, maybe porn?

"We're actually in the middle of a porn-for-women revolution as millions—yes, millions—of women are loudly, even proudly, proclaiming their interest in porn," says Violet Blue, author, blogger, activist, and tireless foe of antiporn boneheads everywhere. If you were reading Blue's blog—www.tinynibbles.com—you would know that one out of every three consumers of internet porn are female, according to a Nielsen NetRatings report released in 2007.

"What's interesting isn't just the growing number of women using porn," says Blue, "it's that they're doing exactly what DEB suggests. It's part of their own private sex lives that are mostly external to their relationships."

What women have lacked up to now is the same "free pass" men enjoy.

"Guys are encouraged to have this other sex life with porn," says Blue, "that's seen as normal and healthy. But despite the numbers, our culture is having a hard time admitting that women like porn. Antiporn feminists ignore the female viewer. The only people, besides Oprah, acknowledging the female viewer are the antiporn Christians who see it (and female masturbation) as a disease they can cure!"

Blue directs female porn consumers to Our Porn, Ourselves (www.ourpornourselves.org).

"On OPO, women are talking about liking all kinds of porn, even stuff that goes too far for some guys," says Blue. "Women are making each other feel comfortable about their newfound access to porn, openly having their desire to watch sex (and jack off to it) validated the same way that guys do."

...and another letter from a female(?) reader about vibes:

Men enjoy porn, but women don't. Here's something women enjoy that men don't: vibrators. Just as men feel threatened by vibrators ("My cock isn't good enough for you?"), women feel threatened by porn ("My tits aren't good enough for you?").

And when women cry, "What if the children found those stashed in the garage?!" men can respond, "What if the children found your vibrator?!"

Desires Erotic Balance should use a vibrator while her boyfriend uses porn. They should also film it and put it up on the internet.

Vice Is Barely Erotic

Yeah, vibrators are probably a better example of something dirty that women enjoy and (most) men do not—certainly better than cupcakes with pink sprinkles. I stand corrected. (But most people don't have incriminating porn stashes in the garage these days, VIBE, they have incriminating browser histories.)

And speaking of vibrators: Taylor Momsen—one of the stars of Gossip Girl—recently "divulged" to Disorder Magazine that her "best friend is her vibrator." Fox News wrote up the "scandal," of course, but got quotes only from antisex nutters: batshit Catholic reactionary Bill Donohue, conservative radio yakker Michael Medved, an elderly grandmother who runs a parenting organization, and some douchebag from the National Center for Biblical Parenting who predicted that Momsen's actions "will result in failure in her life."

There are no quotes—in the interest of fairness and balance—from anyone who doesn't see vibrators as battery-operated tools of the devil. No one is allowed to point out that sex toys are common, completely mainstream, and safe for use by young women. A vibrator is a low-risk alternative to intercourse with, say, Chace Crawford. (No risk of pregnancy, disease, or Axe body spray.)

It's true, Bill Donohue, that the young lady isn't old enough to walk into a sex shop—or as Fox News so delicately put it: "[Momsen] is not legally of age to enter venues that sell sexual paraphernalia." She is, however, over 17—that is, of legal age to consent to sex in New York.Anyone old enough to have a dick in her twat is old enough to have a vibrator in her nightstand. And social and cultural conservatives are apparently unaware of e-commerce—Amazon has a nice selection of vibrators.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Yeh, cupcakes, that's real good going there, kenny. That'a great way to explain the issue or, alternately, a great way to turn it into being all about your own wit (trust me I know this one) while you sneer subtly (you hope) at the unclued-in.

You know how that black woman complained to Dr Laura about racist comments that made her uncomfortable-- despite the evidence that Dr Laura has... issues... regarding Not Being An Asshole To others?

Anyone who challenges Savage's sex-positive stance is not going to be treated with respect at this time.

Maybe later.

But I can think of something that fits DEB's criteria to a certain degree-- M/M romance.

Most men, of any gender preference, don't like Romance.

Most straight men don't like the idea of gay sex.

Many women really get off like banshees to sex scenes that take place after a long emotion-filled ramp-up such as occurs in your basic Romance plot.

And many women-- for varied and intertwining complicated mulitplex reasons-- really love them some two men fighting all odds, be they someone's virginity, someone's closetedness, someone's hateful ex-wife-- to get with the buttsecks.


Cupcakes, pfft.

 

[Huckleman2000]

[...]
Anyone who challenges Savage's sex-positive stance is not going to be treated with respect at this time.

Maybe later. [...]

I get your point. But, until Dan Savage, who spoke up for responsible male sexuality in a positive way? Hugh Hefner? Larry Flynt? First Amendment pioneers, but not exactly relevant to 'mainstream' couples. Moreover, their businesses made them easy to marginalize, even when they had legitimate points to make about male sexuality.

And I'm not sure all feminist attitudes deserve the amount of respect women think they should from gay men. Like many male attitudes, it takes an external observer to see the biases. It's like when one of your female friends on Facebook posts one of those needy status updates, and then all the single men post oh-so-encouraging comments that just look all smarmy, and their gay friend comments "I love when you're being a little bitch ."

 

[Stella_Omega]

I get your point. But, until Dan Savage, who spoke up for responsible male sexuality in a positive way? Hugh Hefner? Larry Flynt? First Amendment pioneers, but not exactly relevant to 'mainstream' couples. Moreover, their businesses made them easy to marginalize, even when they had legitimate points to make about male sexuality.

Oh, absolutely. I totally agree with all of this!

In fact, the whole issue of "responsible sexuality," male AND female has needed spokespeople. Both sexes. Both.

And I don't feel real bad for the anti-porn crowd at this particular moment. I felt victimised by those same women all of my early years after all.

I was just saying that she's an idiot to try to argue with Savage, and that she has a fine chance of finding a guy that doesn't like porn either-- thanks to the internet.

And I'm not sure all feminist attitudes deserve the amount of respect women think they should from gay men. Like many male attitudes, it takes an external observer to see the biases. It's like when one of your female friends on Facebook posts one of those needy status updates, and then all the single men post oh-so-encouraging comments that just look all smarmy, and their gay friend comments "I love when you're being a little bitch ."

That's not especially a feminist attitude, all on its own, yanno-- it's an anti-porn attitude informed by feminist language.

Me, I have a pro porn attitude (that leads me to prefer certain types of porn) that informs my own feminism. But I really think the two things are two things, not one.