Jump to content

Thoughts on this ONE PART of the SEX book


Roy
 Share

Recommended Posts

It's interesting reading about : What normal people do' what 'normal people think'

Sex and sexual behaviour has been going since the origin of the times. And if there are sexual choices and preferences is because there is an audience and people that feel the need to have them.

The idea that there's a 'normal' way to do things and the rest is deviant is ignorant.

Based on a patriarchal, religious, archaic mentality designed to oppress and leave always everyone under control of the cis heterosexual man.

I might confess that myself I'm not someone with kinks in particular or fetishes. In fact i dislike too many adornments and in general I find sex overrated. But I have friends and had met people with an array of fetishes and approaches to sex.

And everytime I understand that something that it doesnt do for me is not less or aberrant.

Bestialism, pederasty and any other of illegal and amoral practices I condone. Because sex suppose to be between people that consent.

But the idea of ostracize people based on their sexual preferences and ideas is as a say before ignorant and a fuel of hate to a society that it means to evolve and be accepting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 124
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

How many movies show people killing people?!  How many books depict it?!!  SONGS?!?!

BANG BANG shot you dead

BANG BANG in the head

ILLEGAL

 

This whole idea that you can't show or describe things that are illegal is ridiculous!! You know what else is probably illegal in most places, masturbation in public!!! Don't see you guys boycotting The Blond Ambition Tour. 

:Madonna002:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Ayham said:

Totally with @emanon& @Blue Prince??
 

to a person (Madonna) who had a very bad experience with rape at young age I don’t think displaying such a “fantasy” would be accepted not only for the general public but also herself! Right?... what’s the real fantasy of being rapped??? It’s sick & disgusting thoughts.

exactly. :cute:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, RUADJAI said:

How many movies show people killing people?!  How many books depict it?!!  SONGS?!?!

BANG BANG shot you dead

BANG BANG in the head

ILLEGAL

 

This whole idea that you can't show or describe things that are illegal is ridiculous!! You know what else is probably illegal in most places, masturbation in public!!! Don't see you guys boycotting The Blond Ambition Tour. 

:Madonna002:

boycoting Blond ambition why? she doesnt masturbate herlself at all...Hellooooo...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, RUADJAI said:

She also doesn't have actual sex with a young boy in the Sex book. 

it doesnt mean it is cool, ok, all haill to the queen cause everything she does is right.

and by the way, touching her crotch, I think, it's not comparable to fantasizing with kids, dogs, rape...

I touch my crotch too, if I need to sratch my balls. Maybe she had crabs during the Blond Ambition, that is why she touched her crotch every night... :lol:

Thank God she didnt remembered about fantasizing with dead people, because that shit does exist... "I have orgasms with dead people" (instead of seeing them :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, emanon said:

it doesnt mean it is cool, ok, al haill to the queen cause everything she does is right.

The "for some fans the queen can do no wrong" type of narrative is usually being dragged out whenever one has no other constructive arguments left to present. It adds nothing to the discussion and it stifles it. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, kesiak said:

The "for some fans the queen can do no wrong" type of narrative is usually being dragged out whenever one has no other constructive arguments left to present. It adds nothing to the discussion and it stifles it. :)

focusing yourself in only one sentence, when someone said other things too, that is not constructive at all. I have said other things in this thread, and I'm sure you wouldnt agree with one single thing, because I know so well the narrative that people like you do. And I dont need and dont have to explain that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, emanon said:

it doesnt mean it is cool, ok, all haill to the queen cause everything she does is right.

and by the way, touching her crotch, I think, it's not comparable to fantasizing with kids, dogs, rape...

I touch my crotch too, if I need to sratch my balls. Maybe she had crabs during the Blond Ambition, that is why she touched her crotch every night... :lol:

Thank God she didnt remembered about fantasizing with dead people, because that shit does exist... "I have orgasms with dead people" (instead of seeing them :lol:

These are all fallacies and derailing of an argument with any valid points.

I am not agreeing with so many of Madonna choices and opinions. I don't agree either with the demonization of women that are outspoken about sex. You'll think is a tactic used only by straight man, but in fact is huge in the gay world.

When men are 'natural' to be familiar with sex .Their sexual behaviour is excused all the times, women are not.

This book was an statement when it came out because a Pop artist who was used and criticized by the media, use it to speak out not just about her freedom to express herself but for women, queer, people with kinks and other underdogs.

It was a big fuck you to an establishment and a mentality that look at this as deviant , dirty and unmentionable.

I love the sex book, when it came out and still today. Not because I'm interested on any sexual fantasies that I can copy from it. Because of the message.

You only see wrong in what you want to see wrong. But you are able to see more when you have an open mind.

Dita talks about pain and  rape as experiences and people she talks to (Dominatrix etc..)

She talks about learning to masturbate. She  doesnt shows any animal sex. A dog in a picture doesn't mean anything sexual at least you want to see that. then you need to question yourself.

Everything in this life can be about sex. The issue is when you only see sex.

An open minded and being less judgemental about others will make you care less about it and concentrate in your inner self.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, cake said:

By today's standards that particular story is problematic and would not be published today, wether it be fantasy or not. In 1992 it was non issue. Just goes to show how we have changed as a society. SEX book is very much a product if its time.

True!!! ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, EgoRod said:

To prove my point. I bet none of you see anything sexual about these pictures by Weber. That shows how skew your mind can be towards your socio patriarchal morals.1554658218_ScreenShot2020-07-16at08_31_52.png.719be23af842a432d56e857f3925abb3.png1974178196_ScreenShot2020-07-16at08_31_16.png.30a95d37d3369780899184a65dc88917.png

Screen Shot 2020-07-16 at 08.29.43-min.png

& who told you that this photographer is right or cool, probably you don’t know that this old guy had a lot of sexual harassment stories in the past?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Ayham said:

& who told you that this photographer is right or cool, probably you don’t know that this old guy had a lot of sexual harassment stories in the past?

I'm aware of Weber dodgy affair. We are not talking about him. We are talking about how male nudity is not depicted as sexual on those scenarios but female nudity is. So many of these photos were use for mainstream magazines and advertising with nobody even considering these guys were rubbing their dicks with a dog. My point is about nudity linked to sex and linked to perversion.

If you see these images and think they are sweet, sexy, cute, strong..

but then see Madonna on similar display and say she is pushing for bestialism, you have double standards.

Same with that text. If you are not even bother about so many male singers reffering to their baby girls, 'almost a woman' 'virgin alike' and sexualizing teenager girls in videos and pop culture.

But however get all disturb about the insinuation of a teenager having sex with an older woman in some made up erotic compendium. You have double standards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, EgoRod said:

Pointless to clarify that everything is a fabrication and a fantasy. Pointless to bring attention to safe sex during a crisis when people were dying of HIV?

Kinda ironic to bring such a story when you actually (Madonna) is doing the opposite in the book. Sometimes I get lost with her... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, EgoRod said:

I'm aware of Weber dodgy affair. We are not talking about him. We are taling about how male nudity is not depicted as sexual on those scenarios but female nudity is. So many of these photos were use for mainstream magazines and advertising with nobody even considering these guys were rubbing their dicks with a dog. My point is about nudity linked to sex and linked to perversion.

If you see these images and think they are sweet, sexy, cute, strong..

but then see Madonna on similar display and say she is pushing for bestialism, you have double standards.

Same with that text. If you are not even bother about so many male singers reffering to their baby girls, 'almost a woman' 'virgin alike' and sexualizing teenager girls in videos and pop culture.

But however get all disturb about the insinuation of a teenager having sex with an older woman in some made up erotic compendium. You have double standards.

Those are just pictures... with SEX we have stories to complete the mess. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ayham said:

Those are just pictures... with SEX we have stories to complete the mess. 

Your logic in there is a clear example of false dilemma.

There are stories, there are pictures, there are not stories of Dita having sex with animals, there are no pictures of Dita Having sex with minors.

The argument of Madonna celebrating on the book either of those is False.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, EgoRod said:

Your logic in there is a clear example of false dilemma.

There are stories, there are pictures, there are not stories of Dita having sex with animals, there are no pictures of Dita Having sex with minors.

The argument of Madonna celebrating on the book either of those is False.

Still totally a mess... that’s my opinion. ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok so to end this endless conversation, when I first discovered this book was I believe in 2003/2004... I was soooo young just saw her pic with Vanilla Ice (blue pic) lol I was like WOW!!! That’s Madonna??? I was shocked & in love then I saw the rest of the book from a fan site called Madonna online? It was like heaven on earth. ??? the fact I fell in love with her more lol. I red few stories like the famous Pussy story but I wasn’t into reading the book as much as enjoying the pics... ??? & finally after many years in 2011 I bought one copy from eBay from dad’s credit card lol! I cherish this book & just last year I bought another copy this time sealed one. ?

Ok so my point we Madonna fans or let’s say myself was in love with her bravery... it’s like oh look she’s completely NAKED, she got balls... ohhh she’s talking about sex & stuff!!! That’s cool, however when I grew up I realize that it’s more about the stories, the messages... & that was a complete turn off. It’s just not right in many ways... & then I understood why she got so much hate back then. I’m just imagining someone like Janet Jackson or Mariah Carey or Cher or even Lady Gaga releasing something similar... haha it will be definitely her ENDDDD. M was so lucky she got away with it. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm kinda surprised to read this discussion on a Madonnafan forum. Not that it's good or bad, i do not judge anyone's point of view. The good thing is that it opens a discussion, and that's one of the things art is supposed to do, as well as making people feel emotions, good or bad. 

The main purpose of the SEX book, as Madonna explained many times during the promo interviews, is to point the hypocrisy when it comes to sex and i do agree with her. Everyone, and i said everyone, each of us, has one or several taboo fantasies about sex. Some people will materialize their fantasies, while most of people will never and will keep them in their head for what they are, just fantasies. Those fantasies know no social taboo, there are no law restrictions for fantasies. Some of us, here, reading and commenting on that thread have already secretly got turned on by a rape story, by a beastiality video, by the idea of having sex with someone way older or way younger than him/her, by pissing videos or whatever... Do we need to talk about it ? I don't think so, eveyone has a secret garden. O the other hand, do we have to get upset and point our finger when someone release a book with artistic pictures illustrating each ones of those secret fantasies people can have ? Stating none of these are real (needless to precise in my opinion but some people obviously need that clarification) ? I don't think so. It would be kinda hypocritical in my opinion and that is where i share Madonna's opinion on the topic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Jackie locked and unlocked this topic
  • Jackie locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use