I've re-read 4 times now, and am at a loss. What do you feel I've misread? And how have I spun it to something completely different? Seams like your assuming something, but I can't put a finger on what that is.
Show me where I said anything at all about - as you said:
Umafera and UR20Z - how do you measure/figure that degradation is the most common reason for people looking for porn?
I draw your particular attention to this part:
"...is the most common reason..."
Here's a refresher:
A *HUGE* proportion of the HNGs (*) you see on "kinky" forums like this are there for NOTHING BUT the degradation concept.
Notice the total lack of anything even remotely like "...is the most common reason for people looking for porn".
That's both the misread, AND the spin I speak of.
Read that sentence of mine again, carefully, for content. And keep in mind what I said in the message to which you're responding: After 30-ish years of being online, and understanding how the medium can distort meaning, I choose my words with extreme care to minimize even the CHANCE of misunderstanding. Or, put more plainly, I do my best to say exactly what I mean, using words that mean exactly what I say. I do everything I can to construct my sentences so as to leave no doubt of my precise meaning. Nothing more, nothing less. The only time there are multiple possible meanings in my words are when I deliberately put them there, in which case, there's almost always a clear indication, either explicity, as in a smiley or similar notation, such as in my final "You some kind of freak or something?" comment to umafera in post 161 or from the context of the conversation, that I'm deliberately playing with words for humorous, ironic, or sarcastic effect.
With that in mind, what does that sentence of mine actually say?
Here's some assistance:
Who did I say is looking for degradation porn? Answer: "HNGs" - shorthand for "Horny Net Geeks", a class of person that's hard to define ahead of time, but once you've experienced the "species", is almost impossible to mistake for anything but what they are. Or, as Supreme Court justice Potter Stewart said while discussing the topic of "obscenity": "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it..."
Now that we've established what sub-group of people I was specifically referring to, how many of that sub-group are looking for degradation porn? "A *HUGE* proportion". Meaning, as I would expect to be self-evident, a large number that I cannot state specifically.
Where is there any mention of what the most common reason for people looking for porn might be?
I was, and still am, speaking of a subset of porn consumers - "HNGs" - that are blatantly obvious to most who've been online for any significant amount of time. I have little doubt, even if you don't/didn't know a term to differentiate them from "Joe Random Person looking for porn", that you've seen the type. Even here on this forum, unfortunately. It's been my experience through the years since I first connected to this miracle of modern technology we call "the Internet", that the vast majority of that type are looking specifically for the degradation aspect of dog-on-woman porn.
I made no comment on why people - ANY people - might be looking for porn.
And I tend to get pretty soggy and hard to light when it comes to someone distorting the meaning of what I do say.
