Top-opolis

[Netzach]

I hate to be the one to point out that porn is hardly the best example to hold up as representative of universal human sexuality.

What is the woman in that picture truly thinking about? That she makes more money for doing a piss scene than she does for straight sex or masturbation. The male in the picture could easily be gay --- they could both be gay and not in the least sexually attracted to one another. Porn isn't any more real in most instances than any other kind of movie.

Far better would be to look at the world in general --- if sex were, at root, about degradation then that would be the primary form of sexuality practiced rather than a niche market.

Pure, you said to Quint's post:

P: The answer, on my view, is that we are talking of the man's intent, and objectively. The woman's [bottom's] reaction is immaterial. This is an old chestnut in this thread and a couple other of rr's threads, and some of my own.

If the reaction of the bottom is immaterial then degradation cannot possibly be the root since satisfaction of that urge would require that the bottom show that s/he feels degraded. You know the old adage that the way to disarm someone trying to annoy you is to ignore them and not be annoyed? Similarly, the way to thwart the desires of one who wishes to degrade you is to not feel or behave as if you feel degraded.

Conquering, on the other hand can be acheived without the consent or compliance of the conquered.

Thank you for the reailty check.

 

[rosco rathbone]

If the reaction of the bottom is immaterial then degradation cannot possibly be the root since satisfaction of that urge would require that the bottom show that s/he feels degraded. You know the old adage that the way to disarm someone trying to annoy you is to ignore them and not be annoyed? Similarly, the way to thwart the desires of one who wishes to degrade you is to not feel or behave as if you feel degraded.

Conquering, on the other hand can be acheived without the consent or compliance of the conquered.

This is why I like girls who feel a lot of shame. The idea of an undegradable person feels like 10 gal. of cold water dumped on me.

 

[FurryFury]

Thank you for the reailty check.

I tell my kid how "unreal" porn is all the time. You'd think it would be obvious but . . . *shrugs*

Fury

 

[Marquis]

What's so unreal about porn?

 

[Pure]

reply to bridge,

hi bb,

thanks for your posting, sharp and to the point. provocative.

bridge said, I hate to be the one to point out that porn is hardly the best example to hold up as representative of universal human sexuality.

What is the woman in that picture truly thinking about? That she makes more money for doing a piss scene than she does for straight sex or masturbation.
-----

P: i think porn, since it's market driven, is a fine instrument for indicating male fantasies, some of which males (and partners) live out. for instance, man will fuck several women, including the maid that stumbles in on the scene, and his sister who comes downstairs to see what the noise is about. so in this 'typical' case, the porn, however staged, is pretty 'true to life' as what lots of men want.

it is an advantage of the 'net that some rather unusual scenes can be found, for almost any variation imaginable. i found these to be excellent of their type.

i find your question, bolded, not really to the point.

it is a given that most porn pics are set up with models. for an exception see the fine 'chameleon' set of the marquis at his profile page.

the models create/act out a scene.

your question is analogous to the following: I show you a picture taken of the stage of Romeo and Juliet, balcony scene, and show you a close up of Romeo's face and say, "What's he feeling?" and "What do we imagine or project that he's feeling" I say, "In my opinion, and according to my imagination, it's devotion and yearning."

You reply, "Get a grip on reality. What is *the man in the picture,* the one playing Romeo, REALLY thinking?" You continue, "Well, he's an actor, and he's probably thinking, 'Fuck I have to do this scene again,' and 'Boy is this costume hot,' and 'Well at least I'm getting "scale" for this effort.' "

Unfortunately, I don't have pictures of REALITY, for a degradation scene.
Sorry. Maybe someone does. Perhaps I'll post a link to the marquis' pics, if he doesn't mind. I find them to show dominance/imposition with more than a touch of sadism and degradation. Would they be real enough? Would they count as evidence of the particular SM taste ?
[[ADDED url is two postings after this one.]]

I believe it's immaterial whether a picture shows REALITY, if one makes the assumption that such scenes do really occur among a certain (unusual, perhaps tiny) subset of those into SM. And I have direct and indirect evidence that this is the case.

Anyway, those are my thoughts and opinions. I find that most of such complaints about examples, stories, or depictions, usually indicate simply "That is NOT my cuppa." I'm unsure if that's the case here.

Best,
J.

 

[Marquis]

You should see the pics I DON'T post pure.

 

[Pure]

url for marquis' pics

"colors of the chameleon"

(with his permission).

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=314829

[[Of course someone might argue that although it's the real Marquis, he's set himself up in these pics, according to scenes he stagemanaged, and hence they are not "REALITY" either.]]

 

[alice_underneath]

beautiful

Hi, KC.

In looking at these pictures, I've been trying to imagine the circumstances under which I would find this scenario "beautiful" too.

Perhaps this is me, projecting....

(OK, OBVIOUSLY this is me, projecting!)

but......

I strongly disagree with Pure's comment that the woman in the photo looks "eager", and I also disagree with his conclusion that her reaction seems ambiguous or somehow up for debate.

To me, that woman looks miserable. I see no signs of arousal, enjoyment, pleasure, or even pride in accomplishing a difficult task.

It looks to me as if the guy is expressing contempt for his partner. The toilet, her pose, his actions..... to me, this looks like a scene of obvious and unequivocal contempt, and that's a very hard thing for someone like me to process into something positive in her mind.

I'll contrast the photos with a different scene in order to explain my point of view here. I don't know how to find an actual image of this, so I'll have to paint a picture with words.

~~~~~~~

Jack is sitting on the edge of the bed with his legs parted. Jill is kneeling between his knees. Both people are nude.

Jill looks up at him expectantly. Jack slides his fingers into her hair, grips firmly, and growls: "Please me with your mouth."

Jill commences the process of providing oral pleasure to her mate. Perhaps he growls further instructions, or uses his grip on her hair to control her movements.

Jill loves to serve him this way, and she concentrates hard - trying to follow his instructions and/or doing the things that she knows from experience will bring him pleasure. Jack's rapid breathing, moans, and occasional gasps all tell her how much he appreciates what she is doing.

As Jack approaches orgasm, he uses his grip on Jill's hair to push her back forcefully and withdraw himself from her mouth. Finishing the job with his hand, he ejaculates all over her face.

It seems perfectly plausible to me that Jill would be thinking: Look how much I aroused and pleased him!

She looks up at him, smiling in adoration. She feels cherished and appreciated.

She can't wait to do this again.

~~~~~~~

How is this different (in my mind) from the toilet scene?

Technically, they are both following specific orders from the Top.

"Rest your head on the toilet seat, open your mouth, and don't move until I tell you to."

"Please me with your mouth. Lick my..... " etc.

Technically, they are both pleasing their mates. Both men do, in fact, ejaculate.

Technically, I suppose that the woman in the toilet scene could also feel appreciated for her efforts. But that's quite a stretch, in my mind, under the circumstances.

As far as I can tell, the only thing the woman in the toilet scene has done to arouse her mate is to put herself in a degrading position. That leaves very little room (if any) for the scene to be interpreted (in my mind) as anything other than an expression of contempt for her as a person.

So how could this scene be turned into something 'beautiful' for someone like me?

Well.....

If, after it's over, the guy holds me gently.... kisses me.... strokes my hair..... whispers over & over again how much he loves me..... how much he cherishes me as a mate...... how much he appreciates the fact that I would do this for him, helping him to live out one of his dark fantasies.....

Remember - I'm just imagining here. But I imagine that would feel beautiful.... to someone like me.

Alice

 

[alice_underneath]

I 'get' as in understand this kind of act I expect to hear my younger brother when he was a teen participated in something like that. He is an adult now and matured intellectually past the need to physically express himself in that manner . Much can be said for 'headspace' being able to encompass internal satisfaction, know when its really down to trivia and move past it. To me its the guy doing the peeing thats degrading. No matter how much adulation he feels in the conquest to me it screams lack of control. Overkill...........

Rebecca,

Would you please tell me what the difference is (in your opinion) between the scenario endured by the woman in Pure's porn photos, and the scenario endured by the woman under the table in the drawing you posted at this link?

https://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=15759347&postcount=1911

In both cases, the pyl is in a position that I would consider to be extremely humiliating. In both cases, to me, the pyl appears absolutely miserable.

We do not see the male in Pure's photos. However, in your drawing, the woman on the phone appears absolutely delighted by what is going on.

Is there a difference, in your mind, between the maturity level and/or capacity for self control of the woman on the phone in your image, and the maturity level and/or capacity for self control of a man who would be aroused by the type of scene in Pure's photo? If so, could you please explain what that difference is?

Thanking you in advance,

Alice

 

[Private_Label]

the male sex drive, in pure form, generally seeks to degrade the object.

discuss

From my biologist POV:

the male sex drive is all about reproduction. Making as many children carrying his genetic material as possible.

the female drive is about finding a mate who will be able to provide sustenance and protection for her while she is incapacitated during pregnancy and caring for the infant.

Which may be why there are so many cartoons about men with wandering eyes and wives that hit them upside the head for it.

The African Lion pride is a good example of this. Females band together to help protect and rear young, and seek the best males to help protect them as well. Males when they overcome a male lion with a harem of females, kill the young cubs in order to force the females into estrus, so he can mate and pass on his genes to the next generation.

Would the female lion say she is humiliated that the male has caused her to come into heat?

 

[@}-}rebecca----]

Rebecca,

Would you please tell me what the difference is (in your opinion) between the scenario endured by the woman in Pure's porn photos, and the scenario endured by the woman under the table in the drawing you posted at this link?

https://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=15759347&postcount=1911

In both cases, the pyl is in a position that I would consider to be extremely humiliating. In both cases, to me, the pyl appears absolutely miserable.

We do not see the male in Pure's photos. However, in your drawing, the woman on the phone appears absolutely delighted by what is going on.

Is there a difference, in your mind, between the maturity level and/or capacity for self control of the woman on the phone in your image, and the maturity level and/or capacity for self control of a man who would be aroused by the type of scene in Pure's photo? If so, could you please explain what that difference is?

Thanking you in advance,

Alice

Alice had I wanted to comment on the Pures photo's I would have by now.

The questions you have asked are related.

My post prior was in regards to what appears to be a non consensual act and specific to the part of RR's post that I highlighted in bold and nothing further.

Your disdain for that particular piece of art/cartoon is noted.

https://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=17228176&postcount=407

 

[Pure]

to private label

PL Males when they overcome a male lion with a harem of females, kill the young cubs in order to force the females into estrus, so he can mate and pass on his genes to the next generation.

Would the female lion say she is humiliated that the male has caused her to come into heat?

anthropomorphizing a bit, yes. and if i, at a time i chose, could cause a female to crave sex, and wan to to bear my child, i'd say that would be called humiliation (or at least subjection or servitude). (there was a thread elsewhere debating the impact of a female aphrodisiac nasal spray that's in development. arguably it give more power to men, than to women; i.e., does NOT offset, but exaggerates the current disparity.)

 

[alice_underneath]

Alice had I wanted to comment on the Pures photo's I would have by now.

The questions you have asked are related.

My post prior was in regards to what appears to be a non consensual act and specific to the part of RR's post that I highlighted in bold and nothing further.

Your disdain for that particular piece of art/cartoon is noted.

https://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=17228176&postcount=407

To me, your drawing and Pure's photos are quite similar, and that's really my point. The images that I, personally, have a very difficult time with are the ones in which the pyl's appear miserable.

Mr. R. equated his motivation with that of a teen, whose behavior you then described as immature and out of control. By extension, I assumed that your remarks were meant as a commentary on those who find pleasure in acts of humiliation of the type represented in Pure's photos.

Notwithstanding your response to me here, I am still unsure as to whether or not I misunderstood the intent of your post. If so, then I apologize.

Alice

 

[Private_Label]

PL Males when they overcome a male lion with a harem of females, kill the young cubs in order to force the females into estrus, so he can mate and pass on his genes to the next generation.

Would the female lion say she is humiliated that the male has caused her to come into heat?

anthropomorphizing a bit, yes. and if i, at a time i chose, could cause a female to crave sex, and wan to to bear my child, i'd say that would be called humiliation (or at least subjection or servitude). (there was a thread elsewhere debating the impact of a female aphrodisiac nasal spray that's in development. arguably it give more power to men, than to women; i.e., does NOT offset, but exaggerates the current disparity.)

By the same drive did conquering armies rape the women. Not only did they achieve power over the land, but the next generation of children would have the genetic material of the conqueror and not the local men.

How could the women then say they despised the conquerors if the very blood of their children was from the controling forces without making the children feel hated, effectively turning the children against their defeated parent? Yep, humiliating to be sure, but one could say that because of our biology that is how we are wired.


This is also probably a part of why I feel sexually submissive, and certain aspects of humiliation definitley cause me to feel aroused. This is how my organic being is wired.

Which is why it may seem strange to people that I am also a very strong feminist. I once had a job interview for position in an animal research lab and the guy interviewing me kept bringing up that he purchased the food in 70 lbs. bags and did I think I could move them... There were other questions he asked, while not technically discrimanitory, the tone of voice made me feel like he wasn't going to hire me, simply because I was female, because as a female I obviously was not suited for the job. It really made me angry. I mean if he had asked me to move some bags and I had failed then he would have a point, but to just assume that I couldn't just rubbed me the wrong way. Makes me remember when the telephone company started hiring women linemen. Some people thought that women wouldn't be able to do the work. Well, here we are 30 + years later and there are still women linemen.

/me looks at what she just wrote
Sorry for the rant. But not my opinion.

Which is also why I don't think I will ever make a good slave. I may be sexually submissive and do some things requested of me, and I might turn over some aspects of decision making, but I am still going to want input into how the household runs.
Which would talke a very intelligent Dom to get past that particular obstacle of mine.

 

[stirbird]

Hi Bridgeburner,

I want to addess this first couple points of this post, which I slightly disagree with. What do you think?

I hate to be the one to point out that porn is hardly the best example to hold up as representative of universal human sexuality.

What is the woman in that picture truly thinking about? That she makes more money for doing a piss scene than she does for straight sex or masturbation. The male in the picture could easily be gay --- they could both be gay and not in the least sexually attracted to one another. Porn isn't any more real in most instances than any other kind of movie.

The porn industry is, obviously, all about making money, and they way they make such money is to represent in imagery and movies those things that people find the most hot, the things that they yearn for, the things that they will pay money to see and get off on. Internet porn has spread out and accessed almost all fetish niche markets. The increasing amont of extremely degrading porn being offered suggests something about real people's tastes: they (porn producers) wouldn't make this sort of stuff if it wasn't selling well.

Turn what you said around for a second: the pornstar may be thinking that she gets more money for a piss shoot than a standard sex shoot. Don't you think the porn producer would rather pay her less, and make cheaper, more "normal" porn, if that is what was selling, what people wanted to see? If he cuts his overhead costs he can offer such porn at more competitive prices. But instead he's paying top dollar for piss actresses. He's not doing so because he's an artiste or because he loves piss, he's doing it because that is what is selling. Whether we approve or not, it's what those who pay for porn want to see.

Far better would be to look at the world in general --- if sex were, at root, about degradation then that would be the primary form of sexuality practiced rather than a niche market.

That's like saying that if sex were at the root about homosexuality, then homosexuality would be the primary form of sexuality practiced, rather than a minority sexuality. Why shouldn't sex be at the root of most niche or minority sexuality practices, including homonsexuality, lebianism, foot fetishism, transvestism, sadomasochism and degratdation? Why does sex being at the root of them automatically guarantee that each interest should be the majority sexual interest?

Smaller numbers practice these forms of sexuality than practice "straight" heterosexuality because not everybody has the same erotic needs or preferences (or fixated on the same fetishes in childhood, if you prefer). The only reason that I can see to give these activities a non-sexual root source is political, and politics tends not to have much respect for realities that contradict whatever attitudes or polemics the political are pushing as the "right ones," I've noticed. :/

There's a very human political tendency to take those sexual practices we find uncomfortable or actively disagreeable and do a form of scapegoating by claiming they aren't about sex: claim they have a non-sexual source at their root. We can't relate to them, we don't even want to relate to them, so they must be nonsexual, right? That attitude ignores all the thousands of people who do get off on these activities sexually, who need them in their lives and yearn for them...or it's calling them liars and their very real needs "unreal." That's close to saying, "If your practice is not my practice it must be wrong!"

edit: I think I digressed a little here. What I think about your original point is that no specific activity, whether degradation, homosexuality, even making babies, is at the root of human sex. At the root of human sex is a physically and emotionally based desire and yearning. Far up the trunk and into the branches that yearning expresses itself in hundrds of varied forms, each different. What they have in common is the sap of desire desire which feeds all of this variety.

 

[Netzach]

What's so unreal about porn?

It completely depends.

No assumptions can be made that those photos are not lovingly captured images of sado maso lust or payment-induced acting.

And I think we lose sight of this all the time.

 

[Netzach]

Turn what you said around for a second: the pornstar may be thinking that she gets more money for a piss shoot than a standard sex shoot. Don't you think the porn producer would rather pay her less, and make cheaper, more "normal" porn, if that is what was selling, what people wanted to see? If he cuts his overhead costs he can offer such porn at more competitive prices. But instead he's paying top dollar for piss actresses. He's not doing so because he's an artiste or because he loves piss, he's doing it because that is what is selling. Whether we approve or not, it's what those who pay for porn want to see.

There's a market for couples porn, glamor porn, and ENDLESS market for vapid cuties in pink pajamas and playboy vanilla same-ol. The market for piss drinking is dwarfed by these things. The market for Max Hardcore is dwarfed by the market for a good ol pair of tits and a smile.

The very small niche fetish producer does so because it pays *and* it gets him (her?) hard. The fetish producer also produces extreme niche because the fetish consumer is more willing to overlook low overhead in the interest of having his fetish catered to. It's hard to expect really glossy well-lit toothbrush-on-clit photosets, if that's what floats your boat. Humiliating anal drilling, because it has a wider appeal will be produced at greater expense.

Pay for models isn't even the biggest fish to fry expense wise. You will always find someone who will get peed on for what someone else will show her tits for.

 

[Netzach]

PL Males when they overcome a male lion with a harem of females, kill the young cubs in order to force the females into estrus, so he can mate and pass on his genes to the next generation.

Would the female lion say she is humiliated that the male has caused her to come into heat?

anthropomorphizing a bit, yes. and if i, at a time i chose, could cause a female to crave sex, and wan to to bear my child, i'd say that would be called humiliation (or at least subjection or servitude). (there was a thread elsewhere debating the impact of a female aphrodisiac nasal spray that's in development. arguably it give more power to men, than to women; i.e., does NOT offset, but exaggerates the current disparity.)

I think she'd be more pissed about the cubs than ashamed of being in heat.

And she may well be wondering if the male lion has a big lion dick or not.

 

[alice_underneath]

I believe it's immaterial whether a picture shows REALITY, if one makes the assumption that such scenes do really occur among a certain (unusual, perhaps tiny) subset of those into SM. And I have direct and indirect evidence that this is the case.

Nicely put.

I did not take your images as an attempt to equate porn with reality. I have simply been using them as a visual aide to help me process my thoughts about humiliation in the context of human sexuality.

Specifically, I have been thinking about the question you posed earlier (post #1990) as to whether there is a disconnect between male and female fantasies which creates a problem for modern human sexual encounters.

In post #2009, you wrote:

It is an axiom at Topopolis that: 1) 'Ethics is an 'add-on'.' I'm using RJ's terminology for the time being.

To put it differently, 2) 'our basic impulses do not moderate themselves' OR 3) 'living by them would not comport with civilization and ethics,' in particular, regard for the other fellow (and his wife).

(I intend that 1,2, and 3 are making the same point, essentially saying the same thing.)

As the Marquis recently put it, paraphrasing de Sade, 'every man aspires to be a tyrant in the bedroom.' or, in other words, 'the (typically male or "top") sexual impulse is tyrannical.'

This is not to say 'no one should ever moderate or control themselves',
or 'you should act without regard for the other fellow's welfare.'

Consider the sadistic impulse, for example (the impulse to cause suffering--pain or degradation-- for the purpose of sexual pleasure.) What does the Axiom suggest.

If someone says, "I act sadistically with my partner, for my own enjoyment AND I always take full account of preserving her self respect," he is not really speaking of *sadistic* behavior (pure and simple). He is speaking of conscientious behavior (with a sadistic tinge, to be sure), showing self restriction and self control. The dictates of his conscience are being followed, according to a decision. Conscience speaks for civilization, and ethics, and heeding it is not always a bad decision.

In my opinion, the axiom that rules the world is the quid pro quo. I do not see this principle as contradictory to your Topopolis axiom. Certainly, ethics have nothing to do with what I am talking about here.

Bill Maher, in a comedy skit, ridiculed "His and Hers" or "Jack and Jill" sexual fantasy material for shared consumption.

"How," he said, "do you bring together Jill's wish to 'make love' on a bed of roses to a strong but caring guy, and Jack's desire to come on her face?"

In a post to Quint, you talked about one person winning and another losing in a scene of intense humiliation. My answer to Maher's query is to say - I don't see a problem, as long as Jack can find a way to turn the experience into a win-win scenario.

Taking your example of the toilet scene, Jack could offer:

1) cash

2) fulfillment of the needs and desires of a woman who craves humiliation

3) fulfillment of the needs and desires of a woman who would say (to quote Quint): "the waste products of my loving Master are as gold to me, their refuse as rubies."

4) fulfillment of the needs and desires of a woman whose point of view is described in my post #2033, above.

5) an opportunity to remain in a relationship that offers social status or wealth or intellectual stimulation or something else that the woman keenly desires.

etc.

The possibilities of what Jack could offer are only limited by his capacity to understand what a potential partner would require in the exchange, and his ability or willingness to provide it.

Alice

 

[Pure]

pissed about the cubs?

i saw a documentary on tigers, and one had her cub killed while she was away. the question was, How would she react upon discovering it dead--sad, upset, what?
the answer: no big apparent reaction--stoicism?-- but she ate it.

N: No assumptions can be made that those photos are not lovingly captured images of sado maso lust or payment-induced acting.

Yours is an entirely general point:
P's restatement 1 : No assumption can be made as to whether mainstream fuck-porn or 'sensuous, fuck-me' modeling for Playboy is impromptu capture of heterosexual lust, or merely acting (for money) .

Indeed, for any dramatic movie, say, "Unforgiven, "

Pure's restatement 2: No assumption can be made as to whether the characters' hostility for one another--good guys and bad-- is real feeling, or just "payment induced acting."

as to the 'niche market' argument, the photos i posted were definitely 'niche,' but not truly hard to come by. heck, the 'real life' lesbian lovemaking films by women are also very 'niche', to the point where their [modest]commercial success is often iffy. showing that

reality-based , straight and gay fucking movies are niche. (candida royale, etc)

returning to the main topic of discussion at present---

i think the common male preference for degradation in a 'hot' context is shown in the *very* widespread 'come on her face' shot. Indeed feminists and law makers in our region explicitly called that degrading and for several years, the official censors went through porn films and deleted any 'cum' on the face. *One drop* would be snipped out.

it was a losing battle, because, among others, *gay males* objected that the (face) receiver wasn't actually degraded.

the 'piss on the other' scene censorship is being opposed, among others, by (real) lesbian "leather" folks who find it a non-degrading, EVEN EROTIC, submission ritual. so 'degradation' censorship has fallen into hard times, but not been abandoned.

 

[FurryFury]

What's so unreal about porn?

LOL!

Pot stirring much?

Fury

 

[Marquis]

LOL!

Pot stirring much?

Fury

No, this is legit.

 

[Netzach]

i saw a documentary on tigers, and one had her cub killed while she was away. the question was, How would she react upon discovering it dead--sad, upset, what?
the answer: no big apparent reaction--stoicism?-- but she ate it.]

All this proves to me is that anthropomorphizing sadness or revenge is as stupid as anthropomorphizing shame into the biosphere.

 

[Pure]

..... [deleted]

 

[bridgeburner]

Hi Pure,

Sorry, I read your initial post to be talking about reality as if the picture shown wasn't staged. I didn't understand that you were just using the pictures to illuminate a specific fantasy.

My point about degradation in porn still stands, though. There is comparatively little when you look at the vast sea of smut out there. The widespread norm is of happily slutty women who enjoy and crave whatever is being done to them or being required of them to do. Sobbing, resistant, humiliated women are rare.

I find that most of such complaints about examples, stories, or depictions, usually indicate simply "That is NOT my cuppa." I'm unsure if that's the case here.

Why unsure? When have I ever presented "not my cuppa" as a counter to an argument? My personal kinks and preferences are irrelevant to the topic at hand which I understood to be degradation as a sexual drive not what actions that degradation might be manifested by.


-B