It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
the great majority of women with rape fantasies do not want real rape
women with attachment anxiety (neediness) have more sexual fantasies featuring submission. Meaning they have emotional issues.
Reaction to Trauma - those who have been sexually abused may try to master their trauma by taming those experiences.
I will repeat something I said earlier, the studies being done show that the majority of women who do have these fantasies, always need the safety factor ie be in control at all times.
As well as many women who have these fantasies have a history of sexual abuse, and are somehow trying to work through their history. They need therapy, not porn.
So, instead of this being used as another way to abuse women, these women should receive the help they need.
Originally posted by Sundancer
If I felt degraded I'd get a job in the area that I have a degree for, the degree I paid for while I was being degraded NOT.
I do not think such things should be allowed
Originally posted by AshleyD
I do not think such things should be allowed and am sick and tired of women being portrayed as victims or sexual objects without feelings. Or worse, individuals getting off on the pain of rape victims, simulated or not.
Call me the thought police or what not. I don't really care. The fact is, if it was any other demographic portrayed in this light as in a dehumanizing manner for the entertainment of others (let's say a simulation of a black man's hanging), even if the participants were on a volunteer basis, I'd be equally disgusted. This stuff has got to stop.
if it is solely based on the way a human is degradingly depicted then the same kind of argument could be used against great literature and art. Being against such content is fine with me but stopping others from making it because of your own grievances is a step too far.
The case has been waged for much of the decade and began when an undercover U.S. Postal Service inspector bought porn videos through Extreme Associates' membership site, ExtremeAssociates.com, in 2002.
A federal grand jury indicted the couple in August 2003 on 10 counts of conspiracy to defraud the U.S., mailing obscene or crime-inducing matters and transporting obscene matter for sale.
A federal judge dismissed the case in January 2005, ruling that the anti-obscenity statutes were unconstitutional when applied to Extreme Associates because they violated an individual’s right to privacy. But the Justice Department appealed that ruling before the 3rd Circuit, which overruled the judge.
The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Extreme’s appeal from the 3rd Circuit, sending the case back for trial. Upon learning of the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the case
Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
Being against such content is fine with me but stopping others from making it because of your own grievances is a step too far.
And that is all I am doing- being personally against it. I am not a part of any campaign or censorship group to stop it.