top 200 commentsshow all 301

[–]KidStrangelove 304 points305 points  (47 children)

This is great.

Chalk it up to another example of "pay attention to what women do, not what they say"

That's why their favorite song isn't called "Clear Lines" and their favorite book isn't called "Zero shades of grey"

[–]sway_usa 74 points75 points  (0 children)

"pay attention to what women do, not what they say"

That is our generations "be the change you want to see in the world" quote.

[–]avagacadabra 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Hahaa, "zero shades of gray"

[–]lift_the_heavy_thing 1 point2 points  (43 children)

Piggy backing off the top comment because it disturbs me how willing this sub is to ignore basic statistical analysis to support what they want to believe.

This data is useless without knowing the total number if women using the site. This would only be remarkable if we knew the percentage of the female population viewing porn. As it is we don't know if this is based on 50 women who watch porn or 50 million. As it stands the only conclusion you can take from this is "of the women who watch porn a great many watch same sex and hardcore porn".

Its like asking mom's outside soccer practise what their favourite car is then jumping to the conclusion that 75% of ALL women love driving SUVs.

If that initial sample is 0.0001% of the female population then quite frankly this tells us very little. Be careful of finding something you're already looking for in statistics.

[–]caliboo 9 points10 points  (33 children)

Their samples are "people who view porn on pornhub."

Do you expect OKCupid to have data that applies to "all online dating sites?"

Their samples are valid because they get a good cross section of users of different genders, races, and ages; which, when it comes to statistical analysis, is about "the best you can do" for any survey.

There's always going to be bias, no matter how objective anybody is about anything.

There's a classic statement in statistics, "as soon as you choose a viewpoint, you've introduced bias." Therefore there's no way to do a survey without introducing at least a little bias.

Now, on to your other arguments, which I'll sum up with one question- are you fucking retarded?

[–]16 Endorsed ContributorCyralea 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Given that porn traffic is roughly 25% female, along with the fact that Pornhub has 460 million monthly hits, it's safe to say this is a fairly large number of women they're analyzing.

Your demanding statistics isn't the issue, it's that you couldn't either google it yourself or intuit what is an obvious fact -- women like getting off too.

[–]1KyfhoMyoba 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Regardless and irrespective of how many women view the site, Pornhub shows that in ABSOLUTE NUMBERS there are more women viewing gay porn than gays viewing gay porn. That alone has got to mean something. We may not know how widespread that predilection is among the general population, but we know that it's more widespread than male homosexuality is.

[–]lift_the_heavy_thing 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Firstly what are the absolute numbers please.

Secondly what does it mean. Just sating "ah. Herp de derp, it must mean something lol fuck da feminists rofl" doesn't mean shit. WHAT does it mean? Enlighten me.

[–]busior 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The sample I can offer is not significant from the point of view of statistics, but decent anyway. I used to play with keyloggers for a while and that was an eye opener. My findings are perfectly in line with the premises of the article -> they watch porn, not softcore stuff but hardcore gangbangs, DPs, bondage, creampie compilation and whatever craziest thing you can imagine. They date several guys at the same time, dividing them clearly into alphas and betas/orbiters, they even use IM and talk with several of them at the same time. If you have a problem with understanding that women aren't what they are and they are crazier than an average male just experiment with KL.

[–]2Occams_Shiv 118 points119 points  (39 children)

In short, feminist's problem with 'violent' porn is not that it appeals to and corrupts men. It's that women might like it, and they shouldn't be allowed to.

It's even simpler than that. Feminist's problem with 'violent' porn is that they like it, and are experiencing a combination of revulsion and tingles that they continually re-experience by ranting against it.

[–]colombianguy 36 points37 points  (5 children)

One of my FWBs many years ago was very much the feminist, railed against porn for how it degraded women and all that jazz. Well, it shouldn't come as any surprise to anyone here, but she got off on rough, degrading sex, which I wouldn't have ever known had she not set me off one time with one of her stupid gender issue rants, and I fucked her angrily and forced her to do some of those same degrading acts in porn. In the weeks we had been fucking prior, I had never seen her respond like that. That girl absolutely loved to be dominated and humiliated. It made no fucking sense to me but I sure as hell kept doing it, and then with all future FWBs, all of whom (except one) loved it too.

[–]ThrownAwayTRP 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Right, its a textbook example of cognitive dissonance.

[–]2 Endorsed ContributorFLFTW16 19 points20 points  (28 children)

Reminds me of all the Republican senators that would vote on anti-gay legislation and defense of marriage act-like laws, while going into hotel bathrooms for gay anonymous sex. Whenever someone--anyone--takes a strong moral stance against something in public, they are almost always a hypocrite behind closed doors. Normal average people don't think about this stuff. The reason for this hypocrisy is that they feel so much shame and self-hatred for the secret life they are leading they are compelled to push that much more of a wholesome public agenda.

[–]ISawJLawsBoobs 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Or how srsters are obsessed with kiddy porn and child molestation.

[–]h22keisuke 20 points21 points  (11 children)

So... There's a study done in which men were asked how they felt about homosexuality. They were then fitted with a sleeve that measures penis girth in realtime and shown gay (man on man) porn and straight (man in woman) porn. The men who were most disapproving of homosexuality were also the men whose penises became most erect when shown gay porn

So yea. What you're saying is empirically substantiated.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (9 children)

Do you have a link to that study?

[–]h22keisuke 4 points5 points  (1 child)

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you! The article provides a link to the actual study, but you have to pay to read it.

[–]Iramohs 7 points8 points  (1 child)

Seriously. I would like to see this.

[–]somepartsam 27 points28 points  (0 children)

You know how I know you're gay?

[–]varisforge 3 points4 points  (3 children)

Even if he does, its a pretty biased study. Anyone who is honest with themselves knows empirically that they could have an orgasm with the right kind of stimulation.

The difference between being gay and straight is, what type of stimulation makes you happiest. If waking up next to another guy and giving him a good morning kiss is your idea of heaven, then you are probably gay.

If you would prefer to kiss a woman in the morning, then you're straight. No scientic exam based on shock porn stimuli is sufficient to make that decision for you.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Even if he does, its a pretty biased study.

Have you ever heard the phrase "contempt prior to investigation"?

No scientic exam based on shock porn stimuli is sufficient to make that decision for you.

You're assuming it's a decision that somebody has to make. That's one of the reasons I'm interested in reading the study. If done right, it may shed some light on whether it's a decision at all. It may also have some interesting data about what people say turns them on vs what actually turns them on and how similar or dissimilar gay and/or straight men are to women in that regard.

[–]varisforge 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Well, its pretty obvious that im talking from a personal perspective. I was once told by a gay guy that you dont know if you're gay until you have sex with a man.

I was young at the time but i knew it was bullshit for me. I dont want to fuck a guy, but how do i make a logical case for that?

What i posted above was my reply to that guy, and it makes a lot of sense to me still. For me, being gay is not about the sex, its about the relationship. I could fuck a guy and probably cum, regardless of how i would feel in the morning.

But, i fund the idea of kissing a guy, of hugging him, of holding hands with him, of raising a kid with him, of sleeping in the same bed and cuddling him to be abhorrent, much like i find the idea of marrying a slut and raising her bastard children abhorrent.

Its not for me, and if the idea is enough to produce results, its all i need.

[–]StillRedder 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sounds like the Kinsey Reports.

[–]Newdist2 1 point2 points  (6 children)

I think it's more about the naive as shit Republican electorate who keeps voting for these barely-closeted homos.

[–]TheSliceman 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Cognitive Dissonance is the word you were looking for.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)


    [–]2Occams_Shiv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    The dull, rusty, bloody truth.

    [–]HoxHound 167 points168 points  (60 children)

    Gang bang porn has always targeted women.

    Most males are put off by the sight of hairy dudes waiting in line to stick their dick in a the same hole. Gang banging is even regarded as gay by many.

    For most men, the fantasy is one guy to many women. For women its the reverse.

    [–]UGoBoom 29 points30 points  (1 child)

    In fact, I think that explains why lots of guys love lesbian porn. 0 guys / n girls means they feel like there's no male competition; they don't have to think about men during the process.

    [–]RedPill115 22 points23 points  (0 children)

    Lol, I wouldn't say "that explains" I'd say "duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh". :-)

    You say "competition", I'd just say straight men don't like other men being sexual with the woman they're involved with.

    [–]chewbaccaisaducksfan 77 points78 points  (43 children)

    That's a great point. Call me insensitive, but as soon as it goes 2:1 on the dick to mouth ratio I tend to lose interest.

    [–]16 Endorsed ContributorGayLubeOil 26 points27 points  (12 children)

    A crusade against something creates an opportunity to be around that very thing.

    [–]charlie_bodango 5 points6 points  (0 children)

    I would never ever trust someone on a child porn task force with anyone's children.

    [–]2lightfire409 6 points7 points  (10 children)

    I've come to realize all the hate groups based around sexuality are basically people that want they are against to happen to them, but for various reasons can't admit it.

    [–]thepastIdwell 8 points9 points  (9 children)

    Would you say the same applies to people who are vehemently against pedophilia as well?

    [–]UntermenschBucks 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    Would you say the same applies to people who are vehemently against pedophilia as well?

    Many people that got charged with pedophilia often publicly condemned it in a way that was above the usual condemnation of it.

    I think it's used as a strategy to hide it. People are unlikely to suspect the teacher that gives courses on how to detect symptoms of child abuse so it's a good idea for pedophiles to vehemently express their disgust and concern about it and seek position of trust and authority(teacher, priests, child doctors...).

    But it would be false to assume that this applies to everyone who is vehemently against it and especially in the case of pedophilia there is good reason to be against it other than "I'm disgusted by it".

    [–][deleted]  (2 children)


      [–]catofillomens 11 points12 points  (1 child)

      Difference is that you're not vehemently against other people sticking their dick in a blender if they really want to. If someone really wants to stick his dick in a blender, that's really none of my business, as long as he doesn't get his blood all over my carpets.

      [–]fresco5 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      To be honest I'm against people sticking dicks in blenders. Something about that doesn't sit right with me. I know it's none of my business what they do in their personal lives but I wish they'd quit shoving it in my face every time I turn on the TV.

      [–]Snivellious[S] 5 points6 points  (2 children)

      That's an interesting case. While I suspect there are some people who are really, worryingly against (and interested in) pedophilia, I think you're right that it's not true of most people crusading against it.

      One guess at the difference is that with pedophilia there are obviously-visible, specific victims. Anti-homosexuality and anti-porn pitches tend to be "this is corrupting society". Anti-pedophilia pitches tend more towards "This is ruining the lives of specific children. Here are some of their stories."

      Between that and an innate tendency to protect children, it feels more like a human rights campaign and less like a moral outrage campaign, which is where hypocrisy seems most common.

      That said, it's worth remembering that not everyone "protests to much". Some people really are just homophobes or radical preachers who mean every word.

      [–]thepastIdwell 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      I think you're right that it's not true of most people crusading against it.

      I never said that, though. My question was just that, a question. I didn't mean to imply anything with it.

      [–]Snivellious[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Hmm, fair enough. I read into that when I shouldn't have.

      [–]neveragoodtime 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      That is a case of protecting children from grown adults, he's referring to cases protecting grown adults from themselves. Porn, consensual gay sex, sodomy, etc. why do these people care about other's decisions, that aren't hurting anyone else?

      [–]ellixan 2 points3 points  (1 child)

      Not to nitpick, but unless /u/doubledickdude is involved, the dick to mouth ratio will always be less than or equal to 1.

      [–]Nostyx 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      Can confirm. Men with dicks also have mouths.

      Source: man with dick and also mouth

      [–]zpatriarchy 8 points9 points  (24 children)

      me too, when i click on 3some, i don't want to see 2 dudes. all i can think is "who are the closeted guys watching this?"

      [–][deleted]  (1 child)


        [–]1kick6 14 points15 points  (18 children)

        I propose new terminology:

        3some=2F1M Train=1F2M

        no more dickfests in your search.

        [–]ThoughtPorn724 19 points20 points  (0 children)

        Actually there already is terminology. MMF and MFF

        [–]1Zanford 10 points11 points  (1 child)

        You mean "Patrice O'Neal proposed"

        [–]PhilipeNegro 4 points5 points  (0 children)

        Big Man covered most of this sub's angles on the radio already, really.

        [–]Endorsed ContributorRedBigMan 4 points5 points  (14 children)

        The only acceptable 3 way with 2 dudes is a spitroast because your dicks aren't anywhere near each others... also balls are not touching.

        [–]h22keisuke 28 points29 points  (2 children)

        Plus you can hold the other dudes hands and look into his eyes.

        [–]Iramohs 3 points4 points  (1 child)

        Isn't that the Effiel Tower?

        [–]evilassaultweapon 4 points5 points  (2 children)

        Lol "spit roast". That's a lot more hilarious than "Eiffel Tower". Why then is it a new term to me?

        [–]rpkarma 8 points9 points  (1 child)

        A spit roast only becomes an Eiffel Tower when you high-ten over her. Which, btw, made me laugh so hard I had to stop when I did it.

        [–]evilassaultweapon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        Ah, it's all coming together now.

        [–]Jimmy_Big_Nuts 1 point2 points  (5 children)

        Yeah, so you can check out the other faggots abs while he rails the girl. No thanks.

        [–]MadKingRyan 15 points16 points  (2 children)

        lol, you're soundin a lil insecure there mang ;)

        [–]Ragu35 4 points5 points  (1 child)

        I know this is completely off topic but I love your username

        [–]MadKingRyan 5 points6 points  (0 children)

        thanks man, I was surprised it was untaken

        interesting to see another fan round these parts

        [–]Endorsed ContributorRedBigMan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        This is why this position is best done on a table so the girl can be on her back that way you both can stare at her tits instead of each other's abs or junk.

        [–]2 Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 6 points7 points  (2 children)

        Like you I'm not into the two guys one chick porn. Hell no guys and solo women is fine by me and actually my preference. However after having three ways with two girls and also sharing a girl with a friend, I like them both. I take the pussy, he gets the mouth, and we don't make eye contact. Girls like to be sex toys, and they will eagerly take a cock in both ends. It makes sense they would watch porn depicting exactly that. Most girls I know love the rough, bondage, air tight, bukake porn. My second wife's favorite fantasy was a dick in every hole, and one in each hand while others came on her. AWALT.

        [–]1iluminatiNYC 0 points1 point  (1 child)

        Facts. The stories I can tell...Herman Cain smile

        [–]2 Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        Funny thing, I've had lots of 3 ways since I turned 40, often with 20 something girls. In my twenties and thirties the opportunities came up only twice. Now I can have it every week if I want. But people think old men can't get young hotties.

        [–]Zuglife99 7 points8 points  (2 children)

        I still don't understand why straight men are so worried or disgusted by too many dicks.

        People need to be way more open with their sexuality. If you are straight through and through, you shouldn't need to worry about multiple cocks in one girl. If you just don't find it that arousing, that's fine - but don't act as though a single girl taking 10 dicks at once is somehow 'gay'.

        Most straight guys I've been close friends with have said they'd never be part of a 2M1F threesome, as if it was wrong or dirty or 'gay'. When I tried it for the first time it was actually one of the best sexual encounters that I've had. Myself and my friend are both straight, we didn't touch each other or look into each others eyes or anything like that. We just fucked some woman together. Even if our balls touched it wouldn't have been an issue - you'd have to be pretty sexually confused to think that you were doing something 'gay'.

        I think people need to stop worrying about what is 'gay' and what is not. If you are straight and not in denial, then you are straight. Nothing wrong with fucking one girl with other guys. It seems like the people who are so quick to call gangbangs 'gay' are dudes who are scared that watching a few dicks will turn them gay, or make their friends think they're gay.

        Thought RP was about MEN, not bitches.

        P.S. I am not attacking or targeting you personally. Just referring to everybody discussing the topic. Hopefully somebody takes something from this.

        [–]Alegretron 14 points15 points  (0 children)

        For me its not the act as I've been the sloppy 4th in a few different trains ran back in high school, but rather the visual... In gangbang porn the naked dude to girl ratio on screen gets really bad... Even in regular 1on1 porn I get annoyed when I'm about to squirt and they cut to mandingo furrowing his brow.

        [–]DexterousRichard 19 points20 points  (0 children)

        Why do people "need to be more open about their sexuality"?

        Why do I need to adjust what I like for you? I don't, actually.

        Now, I don't mind a few dicks in porn, but I would never ever fuck with another guy in the mix. I just don't like the idea and it turns me off. I don't need to change that for any reason. Neither does anybody else here.

        [–]Endorsed ContributortrpSenator 24 points25 points  (5 children)

        Take what you will, but I had to study that famous huge sex study done in the 70/60s where some scientist for the first time started doing actual research on sex which was extremely taboo at the time. I forgot his name, but his pretty popular for his work.

        Any ways. One interesting thing he discovered is sexual fantasies people have while dreaming vs while awake. While awake men had fantasies of many women, while women had fantasies of just the single perfect man. However, once asleep and the unconcious took over, it was the complete opposite. Women dreamed about multiple faceless masculine and fit men ravaging them, while men dreamed about a single woman with a beautiful face and body. Men more often reported feeling an emotional attachment in their dreams, where woman more often reported a strictly physical attachment. Which again, is completely flipped when they report conscious fantasies.

        Take from it what you will, but it seems like there is some vary contradictory thoughts going through our brains.

        [–]IDefyAxioms 3 points4 points  (0 children)

        If you ever remember the title of that study or the name of the researcher, I would be interested in reading it. Post it up here if you find it.

        [–]Quantus22 2 points3 points  (0 children)

        I believe he is referring to the Masters and Johnson research on sex. Showtime has a series about it, "Masters of Sex". The doctors were William Masters and Virginia Johnson.

        [–]_JustKnight_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        Personally I rather enjoyed hardcore gangbang porn when my confidence was very low and I had no experience in my teens. It seemed more like to my brain that I would have a better chance in a 10guys:1girl scenario than a 10girls:1guy scenario... every guy is gettin some. I guess in a way, it signaled the girl's availability to me.

        Same with like horse porn... if a girl has gone far enough to fuck a horse... surely I'd be an upgrade. Just makes it a more realistic fantasy.

        [–]TheSliceman 3 points4 points  (5 children)

        Actually this is wrong.

        Sex At Dawn gives quite a few sources of porn studies that show that men and women are both more interested in MFM threesomes than FMF.

        In humans early days, women were getting gangraped. This is explained many ways. Women have multiple orgasms, men have one. Women scream when they get fucked, (which arouses the other male around the cave to come join in the action), men dont. Mens penis head is shaped in a way to "scoop" the previous mans jizz out of the pussy.

        We have the same DNA as those early humans.

        Women with many partners in one sitting was what was going down, not the other way around.

        Gangbang porn generally is gross, but in terms of threesome porn, MFM is way more popular for both sexes than the other.

        [–]LuvBeer 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        very interesting and credible observations, thanks.

        [–]1iluminatiNYC 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        Good mention of Sex At Dawn. It should be required reading among this set.

        [–]1KyfhoMyoba 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        The leading lights of the Evo-Psych field discount the theses of 'Sex at Dawn'. I haven't read it, just the reviews that discount it. I agree with the reviews that discount it. IOW, IMHO, 'Sex at Dawn' is crap. 'Sex at Dawn' is incompatible with the demonstrated fact that while 80% of females ever born reproduced, only 40% of males did. The equalist polyamorous thesis of 'SaD' cannot explain this, only the AF/BB of TRP and mainstream Evo-Psych is consistent with this datum.

        [–]PokesHoleInCondoms 62 points63 points  (21 children)

        The sample population of women might be too biased to draw an accurate conclusion from these results. Though the numbers for porn studies can vary quite a bit, just about all of them agree that the majority of men in their teens, 20's and early 30's have watched porn regularly or semi-regularly, hence making it an appropriate sample population to use in order to draw a conclusion about males in general since it encompasses a broad enough spectrum of men.

        However, all these studies agree that a much smaller proportion of the female population of the same age group watches porn. So you're pretty much getting the most sexually open women that watch porn regularly which can skew results towards the raunchier, "degrading" stuff, but these gals aren't an accurate representative of women since it's such a self-selecting group that goes on sites like Pornhub.

        It's interesting, no doubt, but I caution anyone before making concrete conclusions from the study to look at the setup of it. Looking for an appropriate sample population is the most difficult part of social experiments.

        And because I know this board loves anecdotes, my male friends who view porn can vary from very well socially adjusted to basement-dwelling dweebs and everything in between, while my female friends who watch porn definitely have a tendency to be more promiscuous and slutty than your normal girl.

        [–]Snivellious[S] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

        It's certainly true that this isn't a rigorous sample, and I hope I didn't pitch it as such. On the other hand, estimates of how many women view online porn are higher than you might guess, and I've found decent sources claiming as high as 60%. Porn is certainly more normalized for men, but it's not actually that uncommon among women.

        As with studies of gender and aggression, it's important to remember that your knowledge of porn habits isn't a blind study. In particular, if porn use by women is less accepted, than women are less willing to admit to it. Your slutty female friends likely aren't the only ones who watch porn, but they're the ones sexually open enough to confess that they do. The bar for men to admit to porn use, on the other hand, is much lower.

        All of that said, there is definitely a self-selection effect here. However, I don't think it undercuts my point. For one thing, a discussion of porn habits has inherent "sample bias" towards porn users, and we shouldn't discard it over that. For another, I'm seeking to disprove an absolute here.

        Even if all the women who don't watch porn are disgusted by these categories, establishing a substantial body of female viewers (i.e. more than the number of utterly broken/messed up women) who enjoy it is enough to draw some conclusions. Specifically, it's a rejection of sweeping statements about how this porn is inherently hostile to women and interesting only to men.

        Addendum: All of that said, though, you make an important point. Drawing any conclusion beyond "X exists" from this data is probably fallacious. Without raw numbers and a decent sample, I wouldn't want to make any kind of generalization except "these people are out there".

        [–][deleted]  (1 child)


          [–]2 Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          Not foreplay, it's frustration.

          [–]Ojisan1 2 points3 points  (3 children)

          Is the top category biased towards same-sex porn because more lesbians watch porn in general, and then the remaining distribution is across all women, gay and straight?

          Surprised by the gay porn being at the top of the list. Not so surprised at the daddy fetishes and big black cock fetishes further down the list.

          I would like to know what studies have been done on which types of women actually watch porn - what are the demographic characteristics of the female porn-viewer?

          Porn Hub doesn't survey their users, so they can only provide the data without this context. They know a lot about what porn people are watching, but they won't know as much about the people who are watching.

          [–]humankin 3 points4 points  (2 children)

          Surprised by the gay porn being at the top of the list

          Fucking yaoi dude:


          Yaoi (properly [ja.o.i], informally /jaʊi/), also known as Boys' Love (BL), is a Japanese genre of fictional media focusing on homoerotic romantic or sexual relationships between male characters, aimed at a female audience and usually created by female authors.

          Most girls who geek out on anime seem to be into seeing guys fuck.

          [–]Azothlike 2 points3 points  (1 child)

          Yaoi is more about guys being emotional manginas with eachother than guys actually bumping hips. Your average yaoi book is 90% guys crying and some sissy clinging on some rail thin pseudo-alpha while they talk about their feels, and 10% bumping hips.

          I think gay actual-porn is quite potentially a different beast, or at least a different facet of the beast.

          Source: dated an animu nerd for too long as a youngin

          [–]humankin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          Hmm. The yaoi girls I've known were more into the sex part so I generalized since it seemed about the same. TIL!

          [–]2 Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 7 points8 points  (3 children)

          I've found most women are slutty and interested in damn near anything, will do anything you want, if they are attracted to you and feel safe that nobody will find out what they did. Looks like a virgin librarian to the world, is down for anything including bondage and golden showers. They really love the water sports. You would never know by looking at them, not in a million years. The only way you know is to make her drip before you ever touch her.

          [–]humankin 3 points4 points  (2 children)

          Reminds me of Ron Swanson's second wife.

          [–]2 Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          My second wife's like that, as are most of the non slutty looking ones. I never have bad lays anymore, because I make them do what I want them to do.

          [–]lift_the_heavy_thing 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          This should be the top rated comment. This "study" tells us nothing.

          [–]fiosaiche 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          That's a great line that the ladies will love.

          [–]brotherjustincrowe 22 points23 points  (0 children)

          No surprise there. Repression and self-hatred of their submissive desires, leading to a hefty dose of projection. Classic hamster move.

          I remember reading some feminist screed not too long ago that started with "Rape is the number one male fantasy!" Long long ago, in my teens, I read in (IIRC) Psychology Today about the top 10 rated fantasies for men and women. Unsurprisingly the big R didn't even break the list for men. #1 was predictably threesome, followed by interracial and...MILF was either 3 or 4, I don't recall entirely? On the other hand, crushing the #1 spot for women was the rape fantasy with roughly 3/4 of women rating it as their first and foremost.

          Count on feminists to cast the first stone.

          [–]16 Endorsed ContributorGayLubeOil 37 points38 points  (11 children)

          There are some feminists out there who enjoy hardcore degrading porn. Their porn preferences and ideology are at extreme odds and create cognitive dissonance. In order to deal with this contradiction feminists displace their anger and shame onto men. Feminists hate themselves and blame men for it.

          [–]RedPill115 7 points8 points  (3 children)

          There are some feminists out there who enjoy hardcore degrading porn.

          Again and again I've found a strong association between a woman being a feminist and her making a point of being into things like bdsm. I really think the "drive for power" attitude of feminism specifically appeals to girls with those tastes.

          [–]xibipiio 4 points5 points  (2 children)

          Can confirm; was in a polyamorous relationship with a lesbian couple, both hardcore feminists, both freakishly into BDSM. When I say "into" BDSM I mean, their lives revolved around BDSM.

          Good times :)

          [–]1iluminatiNYC 1 point2 points  (1 child)

 true. So, so true... :)

          [–]RedPill115 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          Lol, the cognitive dissonance or double speak with feminism is just amazing.

          It's never ok to hit a woman. Unless it turns her on sexually, in which case you are obligated to repeat that it's healthy and normal and good.

          It's never ok to choke a woman because you're angry. Unless it's sexual for her, in which case you're obligated to feel that it's healthy normal and good.

          [–]1 Endorsed Contributormordanus 5 points6 points  (1 child)

          This is exactly what it is. They feel disgusted with themselves for liking it and blame men for that feeling. Perfectly said man.

          [–]The_TRP_Account 2 points3 points  (0 children)

          This is exactly it, and very concisely put. And it applies to more than just porn - it's a common theme. I doubt I would even think such shit up if I didn't observe it.

          "My pussy likes it, but my brain doesn't. I can't blatantly and simultaneously advocate for and rail against it - and deprive my fellow women of what they want (and have the right to!) - so I'll attack it by blaming it on someone else and it'll stay for my and all women's enjoyment while having a stigma born by the party (men) not responsible for its popularity." Okay, I'm dizzy now from that rollercoaster of shit logic.

          [–]joaquim56 1 point2 points  (2 children)

          You mean the sex positive feminists? Those are fine with porn and see it as a form of empowerment.

          [–]16 Endorsed ContributorGayLubeOil 6 points7 points  (1 child)

          No. Sex Positive feminists find normal porn to be empowering. The feminists who speak out against degrading porn are usually not sex positive.

          [–]humankin 4 points5 points  (0 children)

          My experience affirms this. The most sex-negative feminist I know was pretty heavily into bondage. This is a girl that tried to shame me out of watching porn.

          [–]Nguyener95 6 points7 points  (9 children)

          How was PornHub able to determine which "viewer" was male and and which was female for this data? The site is in maintenance right now so I can't check their "findings", that's why I ask.

          [–]Weaponbychoice 13 points14 points  (6 children)

          Digital fingerprinting, based on the sites you've visited in the past (cookies, visited links etc.) and some interesting probabilistic methods (markov chains etc.) they can determine with a fair degree of accuracy whether you're male/female, your income level, interests and more.

          [–]ntgbox 3 points4 points  (4 children)

          Another very simple and easy way is via third party ads. Basically, multiple websites embed the same ad, and use that to track a user across websites.

          [–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (3 children)

          how the fuck do I Break out of that matrix?

          I dont want to provide data for free to elitist fags so that they can devise new ways to break me.

          [–]Weaponbychoice 0 points1 point  (1 child)

          Best case, use the Tor browser (based on firefox). Reasonably good anonymity on the web.

          [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          seems like too much effort to keep the marketers guessing

          I am thinking along the lines of some random noise script

          [–]ntgbox 0 points1 point  (0 children)

          You could disable your cookies, or severely restrict them to only websites you trust. That would be your best bet.

          [–]GreatWhite_Buffalo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          Soo anyone that visits Pinterest regularly?

          [–]Snivellious[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

          It's a damn good question, and they don't openly state this. They say it's segmenting by gender using anonymized analytics tools, which leads to me to assume it's the same way most websites do.

          Specifically, tracking cookies and third-party analytics sites to match browser use across multiple websites. It's common for A/B testing, ad targeting, and knowing what content recommendation. It's also pretty accurate (an hour on Pintrest will give you gender with like 90% accuracy). If they're not doing that, I don't really know. I don't think they run surveys or anything similarly crap.

          [–]1kick6 6 points7 points  (2 children)

          I think you're missing something: this is solipsism at work: "I like porn that degrades women (and that's ok because I'm superawesomespecialprincesssme), therefore, you must like porn that degrades women and this is really bad.

          [–]Snivellious[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

          This is an interesting point, and I think the relevant psych idea is Fundamental Attribution Error. In short, it's the tendency to say that you do things for external reasons, while other people do things because of who they are.

          "I watch this because it offers me scenarios I would never want for real, and lets me picture being non-responsible for what happens. Men watch this because they're violent pigs."

          "I would never live this, it's only a fantasy. Men want to do whatever they see."

          When you attribute other people's choices to their desires, and yours to your environment, solipsism is easy. Thanks for pointing it out.

          [–][deleted]  (2 children)


            [–]Snivellious[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            Yep, and the presence of "bondage" on that list shouldn't be shocking. Fetish surveys seem to indicate that rape and bondage fantasies are extremely common in women, and that a large percentage of both men and women fantasize about the "sub" side of bondage and related kinks.

            As an aside, I wonder if the profusion of fiction where a girl comes onto a guy aggressively is related to this. The whole 'tsundere' and 'manic dream girl' thing looks a little like a combination of guys enjoying submission and wishing women would just come onto them. It's too scary to think of submitting as a kink in an alpha relationship, so they picture a girl who will fulfill their wishes despite their inability to talk about them or stop being a beta.

            Anyway, that's all spitballing. I appreciate the anecdote, and all the sex/fantasy statistics I can find back up your conclusion.

            [–]2RedPillSafe 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            • Super-Mormon.

            That makes sense.

            Once a woman gets that "moment of clarity" and realizes how debased her soul has become (because of our culture) she naturally becomes horrified and wants to seek safety.

            I've been in and out of the Mormon church and met newly converted women that you KNEW were into some seriously depraved things before seeking a change in themselves.

            Red Pill Women are essentially doing the same.

            The Red Pill Woman realizes that without a "rock" to attach to she will be pulled into depravity.

            • Feminists fool themselves about their relationship to porn and depravity.

            • Red Pill Women realize they are vulnerable to depravity and seek a man as their "rock".

            [–]HalfPastTuna 19 points20 points  (1 child)

            Feminists love rough dominating sex and hate themselves for it. Just like closet homos being the most homophobic people out there

            [–]fernhern 7 points8 points  (6 children)

            Just curious, How does PornHub © know the gender of the viewers? All they may have is our IP address. Am I missing something?

            [–]2mbillion 7 points8 points  (3 children)

            there are many ways intelligence gathering across the internet is done and it is by no means a simple discussion. However, most large websites have the financial means to access data mines that extend far beyond the reach of their own website.

            For instance think how many times you are logged into reddit and have also filled out an identification on a different website. They can cross correlate data and determine very accurately what you have been looking at.

            Ever wonder how amazon can post ads to products on your computer you were looking at on a website that has "no" affiliation with amazon? its because of data mines.

            People are so ready to give away so much information on the net and its fairly easy to profile people based on cross correlate and build a very strong user profile of you even without ever having you identified.

            I could go on at length but quite honestly this is something the understanding of which takes many years to grasp - like I said these are massive teams of developers writing millions of lines of codes developing algorithms etc etc etc all aimed at identifying you and your personality

            [–]eddieshredder 1 point2 points  (2 children)

            This is very interesting, but at the same time, would that not be against data protection laws?

            Or is it a case of they just don't care and it would be too hard to regulate?

            [–]2mbillion 2 points3 points  (1 child)

            no its not illegal at all - when was the last time you read the disclaimer you agree to when signing up for a website. Beyond this its still not illegal

            [–]eddieshredder 0 points1 point  (0 children)

            Sign up? People actually create accounts on pornhub? Or are you referring to the cookies notice?

            [–]zephyrprime 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            They have accounts where you self identify.

            [–]Snivellious[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            All they offer is "segmenting by gender within our analytics tools". That's an odd phrase. My best guess is that they use cookie-based or ip-share tracking like many more 'wholesome' websites to serve ads better. If they track visits to many websites via tracking cookies, they can build a pretty solid guess of user gender. That, or they run surveys I've never seen.

            It's a question I'd really like an answer to, and some poking around didn't settle it.

            [–]illwill203 16 points17 points  (1 child)

            That is actually really interesting, and I can tell you for certain that as a legitimate statistic 7 out of the last 9 girls I've been with liked it rough, hair being pulled and my hand on their throat. Even texting me about it the next day either saying it's their favorite thing or they loved it and it was their first time. I'm not over the top by any means, but many women have told me being dominated is completely sexy to them.

            [–]2 Endorsed Contributorvengefully_yours 2 points3 points  (0 children)

            Haven't found one yet, I'm over 100.

            [–]FOmeganakeV 5 points6 points  (20 children)

            But how many women watch porn compared to the men who watch porn in the first place ? Anyone have the numbers ?

            [–]Snivellious[S] 6 points7 points  (8 children)

            Depending on your source, from 8% to 60%. Pew poll says 8% watch online porn, most people seem to reject this value. Various other surveys get higher numbers, and if you're willing to broaden to "view videos with sexual content [for the purpose of sexual content] at least one a month", we get numbers in the vicinity of 55%.

            Obviously this is a messy question. Self-selection is out in force, and PornHub use is a rather narrower thing than a lot of the questions surveyed. What's worse, these results are for categories opened on PornHub visits, which is an even narrower and more fragile result.

            The only conclusion I'm truly comfortable drawing is "a statistically significant number of women watch porn, and among those women there's significant interest in the kind of porn feminists condemn as abusive and male-centric."

            That's an interesting result to me, but I'm definitely not willing to go out and make assertions about common interests on the strength of this data.

            [–]CSMastermind 5 points6 points  (0 children)

            So I run a Tumblr about humiliation / degradation with 15,000+ followers. Last December I ran a bunch of stats about the blog and found that the followers were 13% female, 46% male and 41% unidentified.

            Small sample size but at least it gives you a ball park.

            [–]throwingwater 3 points4 points  (0 children)

            Yep, and to bring another statistic, there are more women who watch horror/slasher films than men. The protagonists of those same films? Typically women as well.

            [–]BluepillProfessor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

            They are interested in it because men have been so pussified they are not getting it.

            If all men roughed them up and fucked them like cave men they would be searching for 'romantic' porn.

            Alpha Fucks....Beta Bucks.

            [–]oldmantrp 7 points8 points  (0 children)

            Women like getting dominated by alpha cock much more than they want the world to know.

            Gentle sex is something I recall from my college years. It was for girls with their V-cards or low partner count. Fast forward to late 20s... girls want hard, pounding alpha cock.


            Why? Women need betas and white knights to stay bought in to the myth of romantic cuddle sex. They know if they can't get the alpha they desire to commit, they need the betas on-the-ready when the wall hits. If betas found out the women he was providing for was longed for alpha cock, they would be likely to GTOW and no longer benefit women as a potential provider.

            The underlying motivation of feminism is to flesh out who is an alpha and to relegate betas to powerless providers.

            edit: Feminism comment

            [–][deleted]  (3 children)


              [–]moiez326 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              that's all great but the issue isn't that more men watch porn than women; that much isn't controversial. What's surprising is that women watch more of what's considered "man-centered" like degrading women, violent, rapey, etc. and by a large margin too. So the small number of women that do watch porn watch the most extreme and fucked up form of it, that which is considered male dominant, and anti-feminist.

              and you'd be surprised at how not kinky most guys are, especially non-whites.

              [–]Snivellious[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              This is a reasonable point, and I've gotten it (less well stated) quite a bit. I offer some stats on porn use, and a discussion of why I trust assertions with a non-representative sample in top level edits (I'd link them, but it breaks sub rules).

              In short, I agree that the tastes of PornHub visitors don't match those of average women. However, I don't think that undercuts a point about 'rough' porn being more than a crutch for violent males. I seek to disprove an absolute assertion, not prove a universal claim about women.

              [–]lift_the_heavy_thing 2 points3 points  (4 children)

              This data is useless without knowing the total number if women using the site. This would only be remarkable if we knew the percentage of the female population viewing porn. As it is we don't know if this is based on 50 women who watch porn or 50 million. As it stands the only conclusion you can take from this is "of the women who watch porn a great many watch same sex and hardcore porn".

              Its like asking mom's outside soccer practise what their favourite car is then jumping to the conclusion that 75% of women love driving SUVs.

              If that is 0.0001% of the female population then quite frankly this tells us very little. Be careful of finding something you're already looking for in statistics.

              [–]Snivellious[S] 0 points1 point  (3 children)

              I've edited the top-level post with some replies to this. In short, that conclusion you posted is all I'm trying to take away. I'm assuming that:

              1. PornHub saw a statistically significant number of female users, and

              2. Those users were at least vaguely similar to other women (not exclusively from one city, mentally ill, or otherwise nonrepresentative).

              Nothing more. This isn't meant to be an assertion about all women because it's an assertion about porn users, which means I'm not worried about that selection bias. If it were .00001% of women using porn then this would be worthless, but porn use rate appear to be substantially higher than that in women, and pornhub's traffic would support a better sample than that. Since all I really want to disprove here is the claim "this content appeals to men and requires hating women to enjoy", I don't need a large and fully-representative sample of women. I'm simply aiming to disprove an absolute.

              [–]lift_the_heavy_thing 1 point2 points  (2 children)

              I appreciate that, but if you read the comments in this thread a lot of people are asserting these findings about all women. Including feminists.

              A lot of people in this thread are using this as an absolute and disregarding basic statistical analysis to believe whatever it is they want to believe.

              [–]Snivellious[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

              That's true, and I feel bad about it. Their interpretation isn't as bad as it could be (though it's for all the wrong reasons) if we go by statistics on fantasies - well-conducted, broad spectrum studies of male and female fantasies do suggest that bondage and non consent fantasies are common among women as a broad spectrum.

              On the other hand, I see a lot of people here taking this as all women like this, or even as all women like this in person. Neither of those conclusions are justified, and it does worry me a bit. I don't know how to oppose that here or on TRP as a whole. Generalization problems are the thing that disturbs me most about TRP, and I don't know of a counterargument that results in much actual change.

              If you have suggestions for a solid edit I would do so.

              [–]lift_the_heavy_thing 1 point2 points  (0 children)

              This sub is fantastic for a lot of things (Self improvement being the main thing) but it's definitely a sub that needs more time to grow and settle down.

              The rationale in your follow up posts has done a lot to counter some of the ignorance I've waded through today!

              [–]1iluminatiNYC 2 points3 points  (0 children)

              (full disclosure: I have a personal lady friend who writes for Pornhub and other affiliated websites. Simply put, I know more about Pornhub's working than the average person.)

              FWIW, this jives with what I've heard both from people within the porn-tube industry and what I've seen from women. A large number of women check for gay porn, and it's mostly because it appears more female-friendly to them. It's sexual without being threatening because the dudes aren't checking for them. It's a nice way to hamster out of what you find hot. It's of a piece with women having gay male friends because it's a way into the male mind without having to put out if things get too real. Make of that if you will.

              EDIT: Bondage porn is of a piece with this mindset as well. I find it hilarious how women will call bondage "not sex" because a man doesn't necessarily whip out his jump. Wait...I'm tying you up, beating you consensually until you cum, wrapping it up for some fun for myself, and yet this isn't sex? I'll take that win every day and twice on Sundays, thanks. :)

              Also, I find it interesting that BBW made the cut on the men's side but not the women. Women claim that men push this idea of being skinny onto them, but when the deal goes down, it's obvious that men don't mind bigger women, present company included. It's the women who go hard in the paint on weight.

              [–]2RedPillSafe 5 points6 points  (0 children)

              Degenerate culture is a progressive disease.

              ...the more progressive the Feminist the deeper the "dis" - "ease".

              So it makes sense.

              These things run in cycles, so while in our present day things have gotten really perverted there have been times in the past and will certainly be times in the future where things aren't as bad.

              Remember folks... Porn really didn't exist as a major cultural element as recently as 50 years ago when the sexual revolution started. Us "old folks" (53) have seen the culture become something entirely different in a single lifetime. Porn used to mean sneaking a look at Sears shopping catalogs with pictures of women in bikinis. (tame by todays standards). A Playboy magazine was like finding gold. Most guys masturbated just to their imaginations.

              So yeah... the sluts these days are seriously messed up in the head and the Blue Pill Feminist Matrix continues to push for more.

              Erase all the easy porn and this addiction would go away. (the internet didn't exist back then)

              Men destroy their testosterone with porn, women go nutty crazy with it.

              We shouldn't be surprised really... porn is bad? I'm soooooooo shocked !!!

              [–]Mr_Mori 1 point2 points  (0 children)

              Standard female projection mixed with a little bit of hamstering.

              'I like watching this dirty stuff. That means he must like it too. (Projection) How dare that disgusting male like this stuff, it's degrading and objectifying! (Hamstering)'

              When applied to TRP ideals, it's about par for the proverbial course.

              [–]Gioware 1 point2 points  (0 children)

              I remember there was some question on askreddit, where op asked what people fantasize about, all the women answered and upvoted DP.

              [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (2 children)

              It also broke a TRP narrative. Look at the ranking of MILF on that thing!

              (though teen still beat MILF, so it's not a total loss)

              [–]Snivellious[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              Heh, interesting. I don't know what to make of that preference unless it's a way for older guys to find people similar to them/their partners.

              Why they would want that I don't know however. OkCupid data pools say that guys mostly only want to date 22-year-olds, no matter how old they get.

              [–]justbeaman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              On the MILF thing, many of the advertised "MILFs" on these sites are in their mid twenties anyway, so I guess that would explain that.

              [–]1Zanford 1 point2 points  (0 children)

              Excellent find, Snivellious. Data talks. The truth shall set us free.

              [–]2asd1100 1 point2 points  (3 children)

              I wonder why MILF and gay sex are reversed? for men compared to women.

              [–]zuk1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              i think that seems pretty obvious? this is a percentage remember.

              [–]Snivellious[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

              I'm curious about this too. I didn't address the strong preference for gay sex among women simply because I don't have a good answer. If lesbians were more likely to look up porn, and liked lesbian sex, I'd get that. But gay male sex has a huge fandom as well, and none of my theories explain why just those two would be so far out there.

              [–]2asd1100 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              Because gay men are superficial as fuck, so as a consequence most gay actors have model tier looks.

              [–][deleted]  (2 children)


                [–]moiez326 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                it will always mean no but when you least expect it, it will be a yes. woman logic.

                [–]Snivellious[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                No means no, at least until contradicted. Whether you hold to that as a moral principle or a legal precaution, it does.

                As for whether that's always what women imagine it means, well, you can see the data.

                [–]RedPillRally 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                One of these days I will chronicle my experiences dating a feminazi blogger therapist who was also in the army and blah blah blah...

                Until then, I just want to say that when I was trying to name my band we almost called it "feminist doggystyle" in her honor.

                That was the only porn she would watch; women getting railed HARD from behind and getting cum on their asses.

                She never wanted that from me, though.

                [–]chadchadington 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                Nancy Friday's 'My Secret Garden'. Prepare to be wowed by female fantasy.

                I asked the girl I'm seeing now what her fantasies where. One included being the center [of attention] in a 3-way with two guys.

                [–]1KyfhoMyoba 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                I did some research a few months ago into the (perceived) dramatic increase in popularity of gang bangs. Couldn't come up w/ anything other than anecdotal, but the term being used for the person getting all the penetration is "center,"

                as in center of attention.

                Any wonder women are so into it?

                [–]redditor1255 1 point2 points  (5 children)

                I disagree. It may be that most women don't watch porn, and the subset of women that do are simply more likely to watch extreme porn.

                [–]Snivellious[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                I can't crosslink, but I've edited the top-level with some replies to this. I don't disagree, but I also don't think it invalidates my point. What I'm trying to argue is simply that these things are not "for men only" or attractive because their audience hates women. A non-representative sample of women still works for this claim.

                [–]zephyrprime 1 point2 points  (2 children)

                Women care more about being dominated than men care about dominating women. Women also care much more for rough sex than men do. Men care more about how the girl looks and just getting enough sex and enough variety in partners. Everything feminists tell you is just lies and bullshit meant to demean and manipulate men.

                Also, it's completely wrong to call all those rough sex catagories of porn "male-centric". ALL PORN is female-centric. The female get's the most screen time and occupies the greatest portion of the screen in all porn. The only exception is gay porn of course but that porn isn't relevant to us since we only care about male-female relations on this board.

                The mysterious thing about this report for me is why do women like homosexual porn so much? They are the top two categories by a large margin. They like those two gay categories way more than they like rough sex categories. There's something very strange and still not well understood about women's sexuality.

                [–]Snivellious[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

                That last question threw me a lot. I wanted to address it in the post, but I didn't have a decent answer. Some theories:

                1. Women are into different gay porn for different reasons. Lesbian porn is entirely focused on showing female pleasure, so it's extra easy to identify with. Gay male porn tends to cast hotter and perhaps more sexually confident guys than straight porn, so it has more eye-candy for women. Meets observations, but seems unduly complicated.

                2. Niche sexual practices in general make porn more attractive to women. The "vanilla" porn of Ron Jeremy arrhythmically pounding away for 10 minutes then cumming on a woman's face doesn't have a ton to offer women. Flashy positions, but bad sex. Gay, group, and bondage porn all break away from this by inhibiting the usual tropes. This makes some sense, but doesn't explain why gay porn wins by so much compared to other alt porn.

                3. Women with strong attractions to those categories are more likely to seek out porn than other women. For lesbians this would make some sense (esp. since the other search terms were often detailed lesbian searches), but it's fuzzier for gay porn. It could be true, but I can't offer a "why" or even a way to check.


                [–]zephyrprime 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                I have know a lot of lesbians and I know a lot of the young lesbians these days like male gay porn for some reason. This is sort of a new phenomenon but it is blowing up. It's very strange but it seems like straight women like lesbian porn and gay women like gay male porn. Totally bizarre. You can't make this shit up.

                The percentage of lesbians in the general population is so small though I wonder if there are enough to them to affect the survey results that much even if they watch porn more than straight women. I don't believe either your or my conjectures are adequate to explain the mystery behind women's weird porn viewing preferences.

                [–]IAmAThrowawayAMN 1 point2 points  (1 child)

                I'll play devils advocate... there is a difference between the fantasy of porn and the desires of real life. Just because I watch cuckold porn doesn't mean I ever want to get married. Nor would I want to watch my wife get rekt by giant cocked black men.

                [–]Snivellious[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                I completely agree. I don't intend to paint any fantasy scenario as a real-life desire, least of all "women like violence or rape".

                What I'm trying to argue against is the claim that people like this stuff because they hate women, and that it makes them want to hurt women. If an eager subset of it's users are female, the claim that it's 'phallocentric' and 'misogynistic' becomes a lot more questionable.

                [–]neveragoodtime 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Solipsism: I really like the rough porn that denigrates women, therefore all porn must be rough, therefore guys must be liking the rough porn and learning to denigrate women. We must really stop all the porn.

                [–]masturbator9000 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                The only thing I find really disturbing is that step sister (men's search) and step dad (women's search) are on that list. There's some fucked up people out there.

                [–]watersign 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                Most women want to be raped and degraded

                [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

                My ex-gf straight up told me she loves bukake porn the most lol.

                [–]zuk1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                aww dude lol. did you give her a lot of facials?

                [–]watersign 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                I lived with a couple and his girlfriend was a raging feminist (tumblr blogger, gay boy cut, useless, stupid, etc) but i used to hear them fucking all the time. This dude would slam her so fucking hard and she would love it..they'd wake me up.

                [–]zaratustra27 0 points1 point  (2 children)

                Just for the record, how many men and how many women visit pornhub? If the ratio isn't near 50/50 I can't consider the female group representative enough

                [–]Snivellious[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

                It shouldn't matter whether the ratio of visitors is 50/50. With a statistically significant sample of both populations, it wouldn't matter if it were 40/60 or 90/10. Pornhub's traffic rates and the rate of porn watching among women are high enough to convince me that our sample is decent. A few thousand people are enough to offer pretty high confidence about the country as a whole if distribution is good.

                There is a more fundamental question that I've addressed a few places here, which is that of selection bias. Our sample probably isn't good. It's better than a lot of people might guess, for a few reasons. First, self-selecting to porn users is irrelevant to the point - it's a point about people who watch porn, so that's inevitable. Second, the numbers for women watching porn are high enough that this isn't a lunatic fringe among women. Third, data about fantasies and fetishes supports these results fairly well. Rape and bondage (sub side) fantasies are extremely common among women, relative to both other fantasies in women and the same fantasies in men. This offers some reinforcement to the data.

                That said, I admit that there's strong sampling bias here, and the result is rather narrow. I wouldn't draw many conclusions from this data, but I do think it's enough to reject an absolute hypothesis. Specifically, I'm using it as evidence opposing the new-feminist claim that violent or controlling porn is anti-woman and has no real roll beyond breeding angry men who fetishize violent sex. I don't think I'm overstating that case, plenty of well-published feminists have made it.

                To oppose this argument doesn't take a huge, high quality sample. We have evidence that a segment of women larger than the extremely badly-damaged segment (e.g. the seriously mentally ill) is into this stuff, to a greater degree than their male counterparts. That argues that it's not solely catering to men, and that unless we're asserting a remarkable number of women who are into sexual self-harm, it's not simply about a violent and hateful view of women.

                In short, I'm not saying "all women like this", but I am saying "you can share this kink without hating women." That's enough to oppose a lot of people.

                [–]Bangeo 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                The statistics seem to show simple search probability by gender and not the number of searches per predetermined number. Simply put it says something along the lines of:

                'women are X% more likely to search for X category'

                and not

                'more women per 100 search for category X than men'.

                As such the numbers of each group are irrelevant because the statistics are derived from search probability without a set sample size but rather from ALL users but separated into two gender "categories" so to speak.

                [–]ragnarlodbrok1992 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                I think that feminazis say those practices are bad... because nobody wants to do it on them.

                [–]paracog 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                This is moral policing of women by poisoning the well of public discourse. It seeks to shame women for wanting what they want out of men. Women who subscribe to this type of feminism are either opportunists, attention whores, or wrathful losers or non-participants in the arenas of common joyous sexuality and beauty. I say let them say on and be called out, so that eventually the mechanics of their social mischief become commonly known and can be easily disregarded.

                [–]Kardlonoc 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Watching hardcore degrading porn for a feminist is akin to watching gay porn for a christian. Despite it might being aroused by it they refuse to do so on a higher logical level.

                Porn in reality is all acts and roleplay. Human beings are natural deviants, it helps with natural selection. Doesn't really matter what you are into (unless you get your cock chopped off) generally having more sex and being horny leads to a higher chance of pregnancy.

                There have been threads were femminists admit they love Dom Sub relationships and them being the sub. But its just an act, a roleplay. Outside of that they would never actually be like that however as a sexual fantasy they love it. There are also more sort of more submissive women who take on the role of dom.

                I don't think sexual preferences are really a indication of anything. What women worry about is sexual acts sort of bleeding into reality without much consent, abusive relationships and what not, beyond the role in the bedroom. But thats something else entirely and can happen to men as well.

                [–]Glenbert 0 points1 point  (3 children)

                Gonna call NAWALT on this. I've seen a lot of other studies that, despite what "sex positive" feminism says, women still don't view anywhere near as much porn as men. Further, other studies show that women prefer porn that has at least one woman in it. Further still, I've never once had to tell pornhub my gender.

                Ultimately, I think they are looking at a very small, unique sample of women and NAWALT.

                [–]citation-is-needed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Further, other studies show that women prefer porn that has at least one woman in it.

                [Citation Needed]

                I am a bot. For questions or comments, please contact /u/slickytail

                [–]Snivellious[S] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

                Yep. I edited the top-level about this - even in a NAWALT case I think it still helps disprove the point about this content being interesting only to men and breeding hatred of women, but it's not representative. Porn use is less common in women, and probably syncs up to other oddities. As for telling pornhub, they appear to use the same tracking-cookie model most ad-funded websites do. Many know your gender (at least probabilistically) without asking - seeing you spend an hour on Pintrest would be way more reliably than most surveys.

                [–]Glenbert 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                Yeah those companies rely on web panels comprised mainly of proles who still use NetZero for their internettin'.

                That said, I get your point.

                [–][deleted]  (3 children)


                  [–]Snivellious[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

                  Yep, that's entirely true. I use a 'shorthand' that's common around TRP and perhaps a bit detrimental. This is a response to late second-wave and anti-sex/anti-porn third-wave feminists. I certainly don't intend to be calling out Elizabeth Cady Stanton or Christina Sommers.

                  It is worth reminding ourselves that feminism isn't always about this shit. 'Equity' feminism is something that I'd like to think most people support, and serious, worrying sexual discrimination is still common around the world. My two big points of opposition are hypocritical moral panics like the "porn breeds rapists" one I'm reacting to here, and the gender feminist attempt to overcome existing discrimination against women through discrimination against men. Defeating the (still real) disadvantages women face by pushing unrelated disadvantages onto men serves no one. Working to balance the scales with things like well-executed education for everyone, or attempting to help victims of sex trafficking or systematic violence serves all of us.

                  [–]foooow 0 points1 point  (0 children)

                  Some feminists do actually believe in gender equality without the authoritarian nonsense.

                  It is ridiculous to discuss equality between the genders as anything but a feminist hallucination until women agree to surrender their “right” to alimony. Of course women will never surrender alimony because they are not, contrary to their very vocal protestations, equal to men. A percentage of the female population is capable of providing, for themselves, the basic necessities of life. But it is a small percentage, indeed, when compared with the female population which relies on the largesse of boyfriends, husbands, ex-husbands, fathers and/or the government . . .

                  . . . and of that small percentage a still smaller percentage of the female population is capable of generating surplus wealth – that is, creating employment, creating excess capital which provides not only for themselves but for others. That still smaller percentage exists in numbers sufficient only to make possible banner headlines and full colour photo-spreads of anecdotal success stories in Cosmo and People magazines: anecdotal success stories which are evasive of a central reality: that for every much-celebrated, much-heralded female success story in a given profession, discipline, art or business, there are hundreds – if not thousands – of male success stories in that same profession, discipline, art or business which are unheralded and uncelebrated: which are “merely” the fiscal foundation of our society and the source of our society's – and most feminists' – material wealth.

                  If this is false, then women are self-sustaining. If women are self-sustaining, then alimony is unnecessary and must be eliminated.