P Subs on TV

[fapfreezone]

At first, I just tried quitting PMO. I wondered if allowing myself to view P now and again might ease cravings. Actually, it was a trigger to relapse. Since I had rarely PMOed to P subs, I considered they were safe and continued to watch, thinking it might allow me an outlet for my cravings. Actually, I escalated and relapsed. Now, I am against PMO, P and P subs, but I still haven't gotten over P subs that appear accidentally on TV. I find that if I watch any TV with P subs in it, I enjoy it and this breaks down the thoughts in my head that P subs are unacceptable and I either escalate or become aroused and MO (bear in mind I have often been abstinent from all things arousing for a few days when I see these things). Therefore, I think the next step is to dislike P subs on TV so that I don't want to watch it and therefore stay abstinent from watching P subs online because I maintain my belief that it's bad.

In other words, i'm saying that if I accept a glimpse of P subs from TV, it's hard to like that but also dislike P subs enough to not watch it because if I think any kind of P is ok, then i'll kind've wish I could watch P subs, which leads to actually watching P subs. In "The Porn Trap", they call this being ambivalent - having conflicting feelings about P means you're more likely to relapse. I therefore want to get rid of my desire to see glimpses of womens' bodies on TV. I think that there are people out there who don't like the gratuitous sexual nature of much of modern TV and I think that that mindset would help me with my reboot. So, below, I've listed some arguments of mine and I would appreciate additional arguments from anyone with another perspective.

So, what are some common reasons for disliking P subs on TV?

? It?s cheap/tacky
? It?s gratuitous/just titillation
? It?s puerile
? She?s only on screen
? It leads to escalation

What do they mean by ?it?s cheap?? They mean that it?s dirty and sleazy to be showing women?s bodies on screen for the titillation of men who don?t know them, like stripping for a stranger is cheap.

What do they mean by it?s gratuitous? Well, it means that it appeals to our baser, more animal instincts and is an empty sexual kick. It?s a bit like street drugs ? reward with no context, meaning or achievement. The difference is that it?s a legal activity with unlimited super easy 24/7 availability.

It?s puerile because it?s every 15 year old boy?s dream ? a naked woman right in front of him. However, older, more mature, married men don?t engage in such behaviours if they are sensible. Partly because there are more important things to do in life, so it drops down the priority list as you get older.

She?s only on screen means it?s not real. There isn?t actually a naked woman in front of you, she?s just on screen. Your brain likes it because your brain is antiquated and can?t discern that she?s only on screen. There is no real sexual opportunity, only a fake one.

Obv it leads to escalation and PMO or MO or watching harder stuff.

What reasons do you have for disliking P subs on TV?

EDIT: corrected last line

 

[cuppatea]

It's degrading and damaging to women
It's unnecessary for most story lines
It's insulting to men

point 1, most women on tv/films are in bit roles and usually revolving around men. Often if two women are present they don't speak to each other but if they do it's usually about a man. The portrayal of women is unreal, they are usually in the 18-40 age bracket, they are under represnted compared to men and the roles they are cast in are limited and one dimensional. Women continuing being viewed as sex objects damages real women (we feel bad we can't compete with the unreal ones on screens) and it leads men to have misogynist views of women, seeing all women as objects not people.

Point 2, so much of the naked women is pointless and not anything to do with the story, it's like male directors have to find a way to get naked women, semi naked women, strip bar scenes etc into every show and film, it's just so stupid and a distraction from what could be a worthwhile story.

Point 3, it assumes and perpetuates the myth that men are base creatures whose only interest is sex and naked women. Chucking naked women into every show and movie is basically saying men's only interest is to see that, not to just enjoy a good story. Not to mention the damaging roles most men are cast in on tv/film as well (macho, unemotional etc)

There is a documentary called missrepresentation you may like (there are women shown in sexy ways throughout it though so could be triggering), the focus of the documentary though is to talk about how damaging this stuff is to women and girls, but also to boys and men. It's not all P subs type media either, it also has about New Anchors, women in politics, female film directors, astronauts, etc.

 

[fapfreezone]

Yeah, I've actually seen missrepresentation and I thought it was interesting. It does have some triggers, though. Regarding P subs being degrading to women, I want to add my thoughts on that, because it has been argued from both sides - i.e. that some women think it's degrading and some think it's empowering. Here's what I think:

It is degrading to women because it implies that a woman is only valued for her body and that her talents and personal qualities aren?t relevant. Some women might say it is empowering because being paid all that money because so many men want to look at your body means you?re really hot. I think it?s potentially empowering to an individual woman, because if she gets paid buckets to do that, then I?m not surprised this can have a positive effect on her self-esteem. It (the general practice and high prevalence) is, however, degrading to women as a whole, because it suggests that women are valued for their appearances more than their achievements. So, I think the question of degradation or empowerment is just like the money ? one woman gains a great deal, while most of the rest lose out from a culture of objectification and sexualisation. Those others who might not lose out are the minority who actually have looks just as good as the actress concerned.

I also agree that it's damaging to women's self esteem. I actually personally suffer with an eating disorder (it used to be bulimia but it isn't really anymore) and this is in part due to images of "ripped men" with perfect abs and my decision that the only way to look like that was strict dieting (it isn't). It's ironic as well as frustrating that the fitness magazines I bought because they promised me a lean, muscular physique actually gave me a belly from my eating disorder. Therefore, I personally know all about how sexualised images can affect self-esteem.

 

[Loleekins]

If I were a male, I'd be angered by the perpetual manipulation to get me to watch/buy/click on, and get sucked into whatever their agenda is.

Commercials, ads, movies, tv programs, vid games, you name it, they wave nudity, sex, scantily clad people in your face akin to enticing a dog with a scrap of food to give you the impulse to participate and partake in the product.

Wanna resist psubs? Get mad about society in general treating you like a dumb animal so they can milk your attention and thereby your wallet.

 

[fapfreezone]

Yeah, I think it's interesting how all teen films present players as high status (whoever's getting laid the most is typically the most masculine and often the most respected in the film), which gives the impression that "real men" are sex obsessed and willing to go at the drop of a hat. I think young men buy into this and want this for themselves and act more that way due to TV and film.

Then, with all these men convinced sex is the most important goal in life and that to be horny is to be a man, they entice them into buying products of all sorts with sex (including moisturiser, ironically) as you said.

Of course, I accept that to some extent they're just giving men what they want, but I think the above is true to an extent as well.