So when was it ever different?

It only occurred to me recently, at the still tender age of 20, that these boys had no idea what they were talking about. Yes, they could name dazzlingly complex sex positions such as the “backward upside down cowgirl” that I thought only a contortionist could achieve. But, really, they were just pontificating on the basis of a few illegally downloaded porn films, traded around on memory sticks at break time.

Only a year before, they had been trading Pokémon cards.

My first lessons about sex didn’t come from sex education lessons, but were filtered through pre-pubescent boys, who received their information from porn. A 2008 report into youth exposure to pornography, carried out in the US, found that from a pool of 5,000 undergraduate students, 93% of boys and 62% of girls had been exposed to internet porn before the age of 18. The report also found that “boys were significantly more likely to view online pornography more often and to view more types of images”.

OK, so the access to porn may be different but I challenge anyone to give us a period or era of human history when the underlying reality was any different. Maybe when we were all back on the farm and everyone knew what taking the sow to the boar involved but that’s still not a great help with intimacy nor consent is it?

(Cue old joke: Young lad to young girl at the covering: wish I could do that. “Well, she might let you”.)

25 thoughts on “So when was it ever different?”

  1. Back in the day it was water-damaged crusty copies of Razzle found in bushes.

    Or something harder and more exotic brought back from a school trip to Germany or the Low Countries and lovingly cared for…

  2. Backward UPSIDEDOWN cowgirl? Seems a complicated way of describing 69. Maybe these kids need t o get out more.

  3. My first business was obtaining porny mags from the older boys and selling them to younger chaps.

    What a sordid fucker I was/am!

  4. Whoever wrote this is just peddling the official line that youngsters should only learn about sex from PSHE (I think that’s the right acronym), the official source of knowledge which teaches damnable idealistic nonsense like, you should only allow a boy to touch your naughty parts when he’s committed to a “relationship”, this being the latest version of “no sex before marriage”.

    Any informal learning (about anything, in fact) under Neo-Progressivism must be stamped out. People might not get “the right message”.

  5. Porn’s existed since at least the time that we reduced the bleed-to-breed time. Betty Grable posters only existed because hardcore wasn’t available.

    And even then, there’s still a market for Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition.

  6. Back in the day it was water-damaged crusty copies of Razzle found in bushes.

    Exactly. I found one in the hedge by a layby used as truck stop. Before that it was the lingerie section of the Littlewoods catalogue.

    But, really, they were just pontificating on the basis of a few illegally downloaded porn films, traded around on memory sticks at break time.

    Teenage boys exaggerate their knowledge of sex? Who knew?

  7. the official source of knowledge which teaches damnable idealistic nonsense like, you should only allow a boy to touch your naughty parts when he’s committed to a “relationship”, this being the latest version of “no sex before marriage”.

    Does it? I thought it was all about teaching toddlers that it’s okay to “question” their sexuality. If they are teaching no sex before marriage it’s hardly working, and it might just be preferable to the current trend of women shagging anything that moves in a wave of feminist-driven Go-Guuuuurrll sluttery and then moaning the fact all the good men are gone when they’re 40 and decide they want marriage and a kid after all.

  8. Better joke: “Where are you going with that cow, little girl?” “I’m takin’ ‘er to the bull, vicar.” “Dear me, couldn’t your father or one of your brothers do that?” “No, sir, it has to be a bull.”

  9. @Tim Newman – I reckon progressive state sex education could manage to teach that boys are evil rapists who need at least 20 pages of witnessed documentation prior to a snog and at the same time tell seven year olds about the joys of anal fisting.

  10. Rational Anarchist-

    I thought it was a well known fact that they were left there by the Porn Fairy.

    Tim Newman-

    Proggies are irrational, so their policies are routinely contradictory. But broadly speaking, one can understand their general view as being negative towards anything one might count as traditional heterosexual intercourse. If a boy and a girl have sex, he’s exploiting her. If a boy and a boy or a girl and a girl have sex, they are celebrating their sexuality.

    The basic idea that boys fuck and women lie back and think of (it used to be England, now it’s Multicultural World Peace) is still central to their model of sexuality.

  11. If a boy and a girl have sex, he’s exploiting her. If a boy and a boy or a girl and a girl have sex, they are celebrating their sexuality.

    I’d agree with that second sentence, but only partially with the first. A lot of the modern feminists appear to be aiming to maximise women’s sexuality while minimising that of men, i.e. if women do the Sex and the City thing of shagging everything that moves, it’s all good. But men shouldn’t enjoy it.

  12. I reckon progressive state sex education could manage to teach that boys are evil rapists who need at least 20 pages of witnessed documentation prior to a snog and at the same time tell seven year olds about the joys of anal fisting.

    Exactly!

  13. @Rational Anarchist

    ‘Looking back, I have to wonder how the water damaged mags got there – were there sinister groups purchasing these magazines and leaving them in bushes to corrupt the young?’

    Blokes heading home to their wives, I’d have thought.

    Like many of us, my first sight of a fanny came from hedge porn. What a shock it was, too. I grew to like them, but it was mildly off-putting at first. Ah, happy days.

  14. So Much For Subtlety

    Ian B – “If a boy and a girl have sex, he’s exploiting her.”

    The problem with that is that it is kind of true. Every time a woman has sex with a different man, her social standing is damaged – just see how she reacts to being called a slut. Her ability to form a long lasting emotional relationship is damaged. Her appeal to most men is diminished. And frankly she becomes a less appealing human being.

    The problem feminists have is not with women having sex. Like Ian they hate the idea of a sweet, caring, even, dare I say it?, innocent woman who might love a good husband. That is, their problem is with what men like and want.

    Porn may have existed. But it is absurd to pretend that the internet has not been the A Bomb of the porn world. We have gone from crude lines on bathroom walls to pretty much an endless supply of every weird and wonderful sexual act you can think of a click away. It is quantitatively different.

  15. So Much For Subtlety

    Rational Anarchist – I always thought Worzel Gummidge was a right suspicious character. I wonder if Yewtree has been looking into his past.

  16. “Maybe when we were all back on the farm and everyone knew what taking the sow to the boar involved but that’s still not a great help with intimacy nor consent is it?”

    I don’t know; the children’s male rabbit keeps trying it on with the female one, but she’s having none of it and throws him off (or bits him in the crotch when he tries the wrong end), unless he’s done a lot of nose-rubbing first. Seems quite a good lesson in intimacy and consent.

  17. “I challenge anyone to give us a period or era of human history when the underlying reality was any different.”

    Well, that’s easy enough, given that the whole idea of pornography is a nineteenth century construct. Before that, there was no such thing.

  18. Porn may have existed. But it is absurd to pretend that the internet has not been the A Bomb of the porn world. We have gone from crude lines on bathroom walls to pretty much an endless supply of every weird and wonderful sexual act you can think of a click away. It is quantitatively different.

    We’ve also gone from faint squawks through a crystal set to 96kHz lossless downloads. All media has vastly improved in quality and quantity. That is the whole joy of progress.

    As to the rest of what you said SMFS, calling someone a slut is like calling them a racist or a heretic. Nobody likes being denounced, even when the denunciation is stupid. That’s why such words are deployed after all. Thick.racist.prick and all that.

  19. Well, that’s easy enough, given that the whole idea of pornography is a nineteenth century construct. Before that, there was no such thing.

    Oh come on, Churm. Those murals in Pompeii
    That fat statuette discovered in Germany
    A feature of marriages since year dot. (They tried it with Louis XVII, as traditional, but it didn’t work.)
    And what about the teaser donkey for the mare?

  20. So Much For Subtlety

    Ian B – “We’ve also gone from faint squawks through a crystal set to 96kHz lossless downloads. All media has vastly improved in quality and quantity. That is the whole joy of progress.”

    Also in the past if someone blew a horse they would go to jail. Now they get elected to Parliament. Which means, as I said, we are way beyond the cottage industry porn of the past into a new era where the unbelievable amount of films of people doing unbelievable things is available even to small children at the click of a button.

    “calling someone a slut is like calling them a racist or a heretic. Nobody likes being denounced, even when the denunciation is stupid.”

    Well racist has become a meaningless word. But heretic is not. Nor is slut. And women know it. I don’t care how right on women are, they know the danger of the S word and resent it. As they resent things like being told marriage is a trap and their husbands would be better off free. Women are, naturally, the main offenders when it comes to calling other women sluts. It goes to her value as a woman. Previous sexual partners is strongly correlated with the risk of divorce.

    I think that the libertarian movement, in an effort to be cool, took up these teenage boy view of sex – if only we could persuade women to put out more, life would be perfect. So there is a strong tendency to persuade women that we will respect them in the morning. Except we won’t. Real life is not like that. Sluts do not make good mothers or wives. It is not a social construct. It is inherent in our natures. You can mock the laws of God and/or Nature, but they don’t go away.

  21. Intractable Potsherd

    BiF: “Well, that’s easy enough, given that the whole idea of pornography is a nineteenth century construct. Before that, there was no such thing.

    Oh come on, Churm. Those murals in Pompeii
    That fat statuette discovered in Germany
    A feature of marriages since year dot. (They tried it with Louis XVII, as traditional, but it didn’t work.)
    And what about the teaser donkey for the mare?”

    I suspect that Churm meant that the concept of “pornography” didn’t exist prior to the C19th. The existence of those things on your list just demonstrates the point, and I’ll raise you Renaissance art, for instance. There are so many Venus figures from European archaeological sites that it seems likely that they were very common (the ones that have been found are going to be a very small fraction of the total ever made). It just suited someone in the Victorian era to invent a pejorative term for what comes naturally.

    And hedge-porn – yep, I still remember going to start my paper-round and finding my first hedge-porn: a copy of “Hustler” in the hedge. The cover was a naked woman surrounded by halved oranges. Like others, I have always wondered who the social benefactor was who left this stuff lying around …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *