The magazine makes the following summary of their findings:
You lot are a horny bunch.
You LOVE watching anal and oral sex.
Muscle guys turn you on the most.
A good chunk of you like to watch bareback porn but do not think it affects your sex decisions.
But you think younger guys and people with less intelligence copy what they see in porn. l 7% of you say watching bareback porn has led you to taking risks.
Some of you like to put yourself in front of the camera.
And some of you have put this stuff on the internet (links please?).
9% of you have had videos uploaded to the internet without your consent.
You like lots of different porn stars but a lot of you wouldn’t date one.
You wouldn’t care if someone you were dating did porn in the past.
You don’t care if a mate has done porn - and the majority of you would be happy to watch them.
The summary points are a little biased. A 'good chunk of you like to watch bareback' suggests what? 20%, 30%? The figure in the study is 95.8% so saying 'almost all' seems a fairer description.
Interestingly, the magazine also made use of bareback voices in the form of porn filmmaker, Liam Cole, of Treasure Island Media who commented that; “If you can find true pleasure in condoms themselves, and record that honestly, the viewer will recognise that authenticity...but an artificial ‘sexing up’ is only going to fool the most gullible people.” “I don’t believe they need to be ‘sexed up’,” adds English Lads’ Nick Baker. “We just make them part of the scene from putting them on to removing them.”
So Cole prima facie appears to accept a role for condom porn - as documenting 'authentic' sex. However, given this kind of sex is rarely seen as 'authentic', it's pretty hard to imagine 'authentic' condom porn, as it pre-supposes pleasure and desire which - for some - is hard to equate with condoms. Although - as you would expect - the piece does maintain a safe sex emphasis, it is perhaps the comments of Cole which are most supported by this survey.
FS magazine can be downloaded for free from the GMFA website here.
Interesting to tie this one into moral norms and regard it alongside the "extreme" porn case.
If they'd proved fisting as "harmful" would they then focus on applying the law to bare-back representations? After all, the spread of HIV is potentially far more harmful than one prolapsed rectum.
I am expecting precisely that legal challenge at some point Gary. If not under English law, I expect a similar rationalised challenge in North America.
Post a Comment