Zack de la Rocha Network Forum _ .:: "the hot seat" ::. _ Your Views On Pornography Or Pr0n

: Black_n_red_flag Mar 21 2004, 02:42 PM

OK, this is my first thread so im kin of unsure how to start it, but i think this is a topic which many people have there views about, but is kept quite, I might be wrong.

So... What are your views on pornography, the age limits and anything else relevant to the topic?

*Prays Intensly that he will get a response*

: alienation Mar 21 2004, 02:47 PM

cool

: ChucK Taylor Mar 21 2004, 03:50 PM

i think its ok but its just nasty to see like 40 and 50 year olds in porn or young like 15 or so

: OddZoe Mar 21 2004, 04:03 PM

QUOTE (Rage against Capitalism @ Mar 21 2004, 03:50 PM)
young like 15 or so

What does that mean they shouldn't be younger than 18....


: thom (himself) Mar 21 2004, 04:05 PM

as long as nobody is getting hurt and its cool with the people who are being photographed or filmed i think its fine.

: ChucK Taylor Mar 21 2004, 05:11 PM

QUOTE (OddZoe @ Mar 21 2004, 06:03 PM)
QUOTE (Rage against Capitalism @ Mar 21 2004, 03:50 PM)
young like 15 or so

What does that mean they shouldn't be younger than 18....

yea cause girls have to be 18 or older to be in porn

: Casbah Mar 21 2004, 05:36 PM

there already was a porn thread, i think its still going, its in the hot seat and its called pornography and infidelity

: Sulley Mar 21 2004, 07:47 PM

to be honest, i think porn is a good thing. ill admit i look at it, and everyone does!!!


I think porno acts as a social restraint (i don't even know if thats the word i am looking for), but in a positive way i guess. if it wasn't for porno, you would have a shitload more psychotics out on the streets doing god knows what. but instead they are at home looking at it and doing their thing. blink.gif

: RATMROXMYSOX Mar 21 2004, 08:10 PM

porn is so funny. the "plots" are so dumb, it's hard not to laugh.

: Black_n_red_flag Mar 22 2004, 07:46 AM

Alot of people think it down grades all females, the other argument is that some women choice to do it, butI honesty dont think theres anything wrong with it.

There shouldn't be an age limit on when you can look at it, its natural...

: swingmachete Mar 22 2004, 10:22 AM

I think that it's an exploitation in it's current form, when you look at some of these websites and it's like teensforcash, it's all built around exploiting women for a beautiful act(sex) so that they can pay they're bills in college. that's fucking wrong.

do i think looking at naked people is bad thing? no.

do i think exploiting women because of they're need for financial stability is wrong? Yes.

it's just like last night, they had the history of prostitution for Boys Will Be Boys week.

The most appalling spin I've ever seen on the unfairness of class structure, coupled with lower class women being forced to give sex to live. And this was all done with great enjoyment by the history channel.

Here's a recent article on sex trade, and globilization of it.
http://sisyphe.org/article.php3?id_article=965

back to porn, I think that in a non-capitalist society there wouldn't be porn.

: kennakb Mar 22 2004, 11:59 AM

"Supreme Court says pornography is anything without artistic merit that causes sexual thoughts, that's their definition, essentially. No artistic merit, causes sexual thoughts. Hmm... Sounds like...every commercial on television, doesn't it? You know, when I see those two twins on that Doublemint commercial? I'm not thinking of gum. I am thinking of chewing, so maybe that's the connection they're trying to make."

Bill Hicks
clap2.gif

: RATMROXMYSOX Mar 22 2004, 12:53 PM

QUOTE (Black_n_red_flag @ Mar 22 2004, 03:46 PM)


There shouldn't be an age limit on when you can look at it, its natural...

um, i think he meant the age of the girls in the porn, not the age of people watching it.

: Black_n_red_flag Mar 22 2004, 01:08 PM

huh? I was just adding an extra little point, sorry if its confusing wacko.gif
I abit confused my self
And earlyer on I meant de-grading not downgrading sorry about that too...


: RATMROXMYSOX Mar 22 2004, 01:29 PM

it's ok. you don't have to apologize for a little grammatical error.

: Black_n_red_flag Mar 22 2004, 02:19 PM

Not sure what people are like still dunno.gif You're all really nice soo far.
I just drunk a whole tea pot of cold chinese tea it was ickey but also quite nice wacko.gif
offtopic.gif

Do you think there should be a limt to what is shown?

: RATMROXMYSOX Mar 22 2004, 02:29 PM

NO WAY. Let `em go all the way! lol i kid. but as a heterosexual female with bisexual tendencies, i find them very humourous and there is nothing wrong with porn. god, gay porn is hilarious!

: Black_n_red_flag Mar 22 2004, 02:36 PM

I'm going to bed now night...

: Sulley Mar 22 2004, 04:27 PM

QUOTE (swingmachete @ Mar 22 2004, 06:22 PM)
I think that it's an exploitation in it's current form, when you look at some of these websites and it's like teensforcash, it's all built around exploiting women for a beautiful act(sex) so that they can pay they're bills in college. that's fucking wrong.

half of those sites are fake...all the girls are porno actors


but im sure that there are real ones out there.....just havn't came across any yet shifty.gif

: Manifest Mar 22 2004, 04:31 PM

its just entertainment people

: angiedavis Mar 22 2004, 04:33 PM

QUOTE (RATMROXMYSOX @ Mar 22 2004, 10:29 PM)
NO WAY. Let `em go all the way! lol i kid. but as a heterosexual female with bisexual tendencies, i find them very humourous and there is nothing wrong with porn. god gay porn is hilarious!

What is "god gay porn"?

: RATMROXMYSOX Mar 22 2004, 05:06 PM

QUOTE (angiedavis @ Mar 23 2004, 12:33 AM)
QUOTE (RATMROXMYSOX @ Mar 22 2004, 10:29 PM)
NO WAY. Let `em go all the way! lol i kid. but as a heterosexual female with bisexual tendencies, i find them very humourous and there is nothing wrong with porn. god gay porn is hilarious!

What is "god gay porn"?

I should have put a comma. Crylol.gif

: Manifest Mar 22 2004, 05:16 PM

and an extra O

: zackfan1234 Mar 22 2004, 05:30 PM

i think porn ruins marriages. . . shifty.gif

: Manifest Mar 22 2004, 06:40 PM

are you married?

: Black_n_red_flag Mar 23 2004, 12:14 AM

I think people like different types of porn not just the Straight or Gay, I won't put them all down because they might not be suitable for this forum...

: Manifest Mar 23 2004, 12:52 AM

I like the story line flicks, at times you forget you are watching a snuff flick

: Sulley Mar 23 2004, 06:01 PM

QUOTE (Manifest @ Mar 23 2004, 08:52 AM)
I like the story line flicks, at times you forget you are watching a snuff flick

lol, i think you mean smut


snuff is that nasty nasty nasty shit

: angiedavis Mar 24 2004, 09:20 AM

^Manifest does mean snuff not smut.




: Black_n_red_flag Mar 24 2004, 10:29 AM

I dont get that what you lot are on about?

: alienation Mar 25 2004, 01:54 AM

pimps up hoes down

: RATMROXMYSOX Mar 26 2004, 05:27 PM

Real Sex on HBO is funny

: Manifest Mar 26 2004, 05:36 PM

did you see the one about the life-like sex dolls

: Defiant One Mar 26 2004, 05:37 PM

real sex is gay, it's not hardcore enough

: Manifest Mar 26 2004, 05:48 PM

wow, Mtv is hardcore enough for me

: elisium Mar 26 2004, 06:04 PM

Crylol.gif

: Sara Mar 26 2004, 10:41 PM

QUOTE (alienation @ Mar 25 2004, 09:54 PM)
pimps up hoes down

and
QUOTE
real sex is gay, it's not hardcore enough


round and round we go...really ill expressions...


unless im missing something? unsure.gif

: Turd Ferguson Mar 27 2004, 11:48 AM

I don't like that Asian fetish porn shit. I really really don't.....it just promotes racist attitudes toward women of Asian and Southeast Asian descent. (it's still so prominent today... cry.gif )

I hate it when men think I'm some sort of whore cuz I'm Filipina and I should be "sucky sucky fucky long time" to them.... mad.gif

: elisium Mar 27 2004, 11:53 AM

cry.gif

: Turd Ferguson Mar 27 2004, 12:02 PM

this concerns the whole sex trade in Southeast Asia (particularly in the Philippines):

Export of Filipinas for the Sex Trade
The top country recipient of Filipinas recruited into the sex trade has been Japan. The women are exported under a variety of disguises: as “cultural dancers,” “entertainers,” etc. Filipinas are trafficked into Europe, particularly The Netherlands, Belgium and Germany; into the Middle East where they work in the nightclubs of Egypt, Bahrain, Yemen, etc.; and even to such impoverished countries as Nigeria in Africa. Many of these women are tricked and deceived, being promised jobs as waitresses or nannies, only to discover too late that they are meant to be prostitutes.

Sex Tourism
The Philippines has become a “hot spot” for sex tourists, in a circuit that includes Thailand and recently, Vietnam and Cambodia. Sex tourism includes traveling pedophiles who considered Thailand, the Philippines and, until the war broke out, Sri Lanka as their ultimate destinations.

Sex tourism is highly organized and often imbedded in regular tourism. A small agency operating in the US sends 15 men to the Philippines monthly. A $2,500 payment includes fare, hotel room, hotel breakfasts and a smorgasbord of women nightly. Should the client choose to marry one of the “girls,” the travel agency also helps in the marriage and immigration documents.

Sex tourism started in the 1970s, when the Marcos Dictatorship embarked on an intense campaign to attract visitors to the Philippines so as to raise quick cash to pay the interest on huge loans from the IMF/WB. A portion of the loans was provided by IMF/WB for the construction of shoulder-to-shoulder first-class hotels, which needed tourists to be profitable. The Marcos Dictatorship started its tourism development with the hosting of an international beauty contest. The Ramos government started its tourism development plan by hosting the same international beauty pageant.

Mail-order Brides
Considered a legitimate business in many countries, mail-order bride (MOB) agencies provide men with names, addresses, telephone numbers, pictures and vital statistics of women listed in their catalog or website. The men pay from $50-$800 for batches of names and relevant information. The agencies claim they do not sell women; they only sell photos, names and addresses. But they do offer extra service to their clientele who are all men. They teach the men what to write to the women (“don’t write you’re a truck driver; say you’re in the trucking business”) and how to use the women’s noblest sentiment – the dream of lifting their parents and sibling from poverty – to agree to marry a stranger and live in an alien land. Many, many, many Filipinas have ended up trafficked, battered, abused, raped and/or murdered in this power relationship masquerading as marriage.

Although MOBs from Russia and Eastern Europe are widely reported on in the media, a casual perusal of the catalog of the largest MOB agency in the US shows that nearly 70% of the women for sale come from the Philippines. The US is the top recipient of MOBs from the Philippines, followed by Australia and then the rest of Europe. Some aberrant practices are the so-called 30-day warranty (after 30 days, if the man is not satisfied, he can return the woman to the agency), the “discovery” clause (having sex with the woman to determine if she is satisfactory) and “specialization” – i.e., providing wives to the physically disabled so that they save on homecare and nursing costs.

Domestic Prostitution
The Philippines, per ILO figures, has close to 800,000 women in the sex trade, already overtaking Thailand in terms of the absolute number of prostitutes. The increase is largely due to women’s dispossession under globalization; destruction caused by cultural imperialism of kinship-based safety nets; and the demand for human bodies by the sex trade, as this relies largely on youth and comeliness for profit.


from http://www.purplerosecampaign.org

: Casbah Mar 27 2004, 12:29 PM

i read something in the paper about that happening in mexico too, exept it was primarily with children... sad.gif

theres some fucked up people out there

: Banksy Mar 27 2004, 02:25 PM

i think the asian fetish stuff is wrong it promotes racism in a suttle way and gives a sterioypical view of asians to the western world which is completly false

: Moremi Mar 28 2004, 07:56 AM

Same happens with other people of color...black people are stereotyped in porn, so are Indians. I really hate the way black men are portrayed in porn.

: Black_n_red_flag Mar 30 2004, 09:09 AM

I dont think black people are steriotyped to be porn stars or prostetutes, its definatley white women search "porn" on google and i bet the majority would be wight females. Black males i think are steriotyped to pimps because of the gangster films.

: Moremi Mar 30 2004, 11:14 AM

And they make porn like that where black men play those roles. Do a search on google for that. I guess every race is effected really. Because the sexual stereotypes that flourish in this society are what people expect and want to see. Sometimes I watch the Howard Stern show and some of the white porn stars he's interviewed have said they can not or will not make black porn because it will hurt their careers. If our attitudes about race are played out in film, why wouldn't it be in porn? They're making what people want to see ermm.gif whether it's the petite and submissive Asian woman or the gigantic black man with the huge penis rolleyes.gif It's another reflection of what goes on in our society.

Anyway on another subject...
I came across this short film called http://atomfilms.shockwave.com/af/content/atom_489. It's a comedy. Some people at the site posted that it was racist. I think it's poking fun at the stereotypes of Asians in porn movies. It was written and directed by an Aisan filmmaker.

: Turd Ferguson Mar 30 2004, 03:58 PM

^^ Asian Pride Porn is one of the most hillarious things I've seen! I like that short film a LOT! laugh.gif I don't find it offensive at all. Greg Pak is the man!!!

HOLLAH!!

: grimeline Mar 30 2004, 05:18 PM

yes holla

: Turd Ferguson Mar 30 2004, 08:15 PM

did anyone else see Greg Pak's other film, "All Amateur Ecstacy"? Also very hillarious rofl1.gif

: Underground Apr 18 2004, 09:50 PM

QUOTE (Manifest @ Mar 23 2004, 02:40 AM)
are you married?

obviously not, it was just said that porn ruins marriages

: zapatista Apr 18 2004, 09:53 PM

Good times.... You guys hear about this?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/Movies/04/15/porn.moratorium.ap/

: Sara Apr 18 2004, 10:33 PM

^^ i saw that on the news last night, disturbing!


there was also something bout a famous porn actor who contracted hiv while filming in brazil, then gave it to a 21yr old actress who is new to the industry...that's pretty bad... unsure.gif

: Metzli Apr 18 2004, 11:46 PM

it is disturbing. sad.gif

: Moremi Apr 19 2004, 06:08 AM

QUOTE (zapatista @ Apr 19 2004, 01:53 AM)
Good times.... You guys hear about this?

http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/Movies/04/15/porn.moratorium.ap/

It's not the first time a porn star has contracted AIDS. So many porn stars have died from AIDS going all the way back to the 80's. When it came out that Magic Johnson had AIDS, there were rumors that he contracted it from a porn star who died from the virus. Also, the movie Boogie Nights was loosely based on the life of John Holmes, who died from AIDS.

QUOTE
"It's very scary," she said. "This is kind of a wake-up call for everybody."

doh.gif
That statement just annoyed me. Why weren't you scared before? Even though they test the actors and some of them use condoms now, it's not entirely safe. You can have the virus and it can go undetected for years. Don't they know this? And many of these porns stars actually believe that you can't get AIDS from oral sex. I think many of them just don't care.

: Moremi Apr 19 2004, 06:15 AM

QUOTE (kawaii_buttercup @ Mar 30 2004, 07:58 PM)
^^ Asian Pride Porn is one of the most hillarious things I've seen! I like that short film a LOT! laugh.gif I don't find it offensive at all. Greg Pak is the man!!!

HOLLAH!!

Glad you enjoyed it grin.gif and yes I saw All Amateur Ecstacy laugh.gif

: RATMROXMYSOX Apr 19 2004, 06:51 PM

Why do some people call it "pron" I heard like one person say that. That's kinda weird.

: Metzli Apr 19 2004, 09:13 PM

hmm.gif i dunno..

i thought it was a typo.. wacko.gif

: Casbah Apr 19 2004, 09:19 PM

pron sounds like an old video game

: joseplluissans Apr 21 2004, 01:30 AM

QUOTE
back to porn, I think that in a non-capitalist society there wouldn't be porn.


So why are people posting nude pictures of themselves on various forums and galleries then?

I think that there would indeed be porn in a non-capitalist society too, but the nature of it would be different.
There are always exhibitionists among us.

Also think about children working in sweatshops in third world countries. Isn´t that a similar problem to porn industry´s abuse of poorly educated unemployed women(Well okay, the children are practically slaves, but besides that)?

I admit enjoying my occasional porn, not contributing in donating money for that cause. huh.gif

: insurrection Apr 22 2004, 12:41 PM

pr0n is the "geek word" i guess you could say, for porn (think 1337 5p33k if u know what that means...)
anyway... the thing that bugs me most about it is the degradation of women and the fact that they are always trying to show men as superior.
it can be some fucked up shit. it really depends on what ur lookin at... softcore is alright.

: Sara Apr 22 2004, 08:33 PM

it is beyond me why it's degrading to women but not men...it's not ok to have nude women but ok to have nude men? why is it degrading to women when women have sex with men for it to be viewed by ppl? is it because it becomes public or like are you guys against the act of sex itself?

are you guys referring to bondage and all of that? there are adults out there that enjoy being handcuffed and whipped etc etc, both men and women. are they being degraded when they do that?

also, someone mentioned thet don't like how it exploits women...yet you watch it and enjoy it? it doesn't matter if u don't pay for it...you are watching those women that are being "exploited" in your view, and you are enjoying that? huh.gif


for the record, it's a generalization to say that all women in the porn industry are being exploited. it's a job, and some women in it love what they're doing and they enjoy it and are happy about the money they are receiving.


and porn actors wouldn't be referred to as "exhibionist" that's a psychological disorder.

: insurrection Apr 22 2004, 08:37 PM

QUOTE (Sarah @ Apr 23 2004, 04:33 AM)
it is beyond me why it's degrading to women but not men...it's not ok to have nude women but ok to have nude men?

thats a good point... it is degrading to both sexes...

: Sara Apr 22 2004, 08:41 PM

why do you believe that it is degrading to both sexes?

: Holter Apr 22 2004, 08:45 PM

wavenew.gif

: Sara Apr 23 2004, 04:52 AM

why did u edit it?! shifty.gif

: Holter Apr 23 2004, 12:30 PM

cause it wasnt as funny as I thought, plus I didnt realize this was a hot seat topic, and I know how you like to keep things serious in here wink.gif

But I do agree with you that people that work in the porn industry do so because they either enjoy it, or the make lots of money doing it. Actually the men in porn get paid waaaaay less than the women, so maybe the guys are being exploited? But degrading? No way, they know what they are doing.

: Turd Ferguson Apr 23 2004, 01:02 PM

What percentage (if there are statistics on this) of female porn stars fake their orgasms? I've noticed blatant faking in some productions laughing.gif

Not to veer off topic, but don't women lose sensitivity in their genitals after they've slept with so many men?? Isn't the tightness of the vaginal muscles a factor in making sex incredible?

*sorry if I worded this wrong. I'm a dork nerd.gif

: Manifest Apr 23 2004, 01:50 PM

lol, Tarantino's rant in Reservoir Dogs where he talks about the meaning of Madonna's song Like a Virgin made me think they same, I'm extremely curious of women actually lose sesitivity down there, any gynecologists in the house?

: insurrection Apr 23 2004, 03:17 PM

i dont even know what i believe rolleyes.gif
the more i think about it the more none of it makes sense. i guess i can see where you're coming from when u say its not degrading (is that what you meant or are you just wondering why i think that? i will post back)

: zapatista Apr 23 2004, 05:03 PM

QUOTE (kawaii_buttercup @ Apr 23 2004, 04:02 PM)
What percentage (if there are statistics on this) of female porn stars fake their orgasms?  I've noticed blatant faking in some productions laughing.gif

Well, of course they fake. Studies show that up to 75% of women can't reach climax from intercourse alone... (sorry guys), so if that percentage of porn stars faked orgasms, i would say that's about right on.

so, guys.. ya gotta work it ok.

QUOTE
Not to veer off topic, but don't women lose sensitivity in their genitals after they've slept with so many men??  Isn't the tightness of the vaginal muscles a factor in making sex incredible?

No, you don't lose sensitivity.. as long as you did kegel exercises your vaginal muscles would stay in shape.. and even if you didn't.. you still wouldn't lose sensitivity.. you wouldn't stay AS "tight". rolleyes.gif If you think about it, that question doesn't even make sence..

QUOTE
don't women lose sensitivity in their genitals after they've slept with so many men??

is there some kind of magic number? what's the difference between sleeping with 100 men, and sleeping with one man 100 times? So, the answer is NO. Altho, there are STDs you can get that will kill sensitivity, so, haha I wouldn't suggest sleeping around.

: Casbah Apr 23 2004, 05:12 PM

zap, you know everything laugh.gif

: zapatista Apr 23 2004, 05:14 PM

Well, I should know this.. I am in med. school. nerd.gif

: Casbah Apr 23 2004, 05:45 PM

ohhh cool!! you gonna be a doctor?? smile.gif


i havent seen any topics or mentioning of this...but has anybody seen or read anything about this AIDS scare thats basically shut down half of the porn industry, if so, what do yall think?

: zapatista Apr 23 2004, 08:29 PM

^^yea, I posted on it a page back.. tongue.gif

: Casbah Apr 23 2004, 08:50 PM

doh! my bad sad.gif

: Sara Apr 23 2004, 09:25 PM

QUOTE (insurrection @ Apr 24 2004, 11:17 AM)
i guess i can see where you're coming from when u say its not degrading (is that what you meant or are you just wondering why i think that? i will post back)

i dont think it's degrading, but i was just curious as to why you think it is, it would be great to see everyone share their views. the problem is, ppl say things like "it's degrading to women" "women are objects, men are subjects" and leave it at that...and to me, that doesn't mean anything, unless the person explains why laugh.gif

: joseplluissans Apr 28 2004, 02:06 AM

QUOTE
and porn actors wouldn't be referred to as "exhibionist" that's a psychological disorder


Well, I meant that if there wouldn´t a thing called porn, that doesn´t mean that people wouldn´t post their pictures to others. After all, doesn´t exibitionism mean that a person like´s to show off itself to others?

And me talking about not paying for the porn, meant that I don´t support the industry. I support the idea though. Of course most of the porn actors enjoy what they are doing, I couldn´t imagine myself something I don´t like for a living. You HAVE to be a little into it!

When talking about the freewillingnes (is that a word? Well, you know what I mean), I think that not all are so lucky in terms of choosin freely what they are doing. For example a girl in some third world country doesn´t have too many options (especially if her family have sold her to someone). Selling children to work in the sex industry is a reality in the 21st century.
sad.gif

: red@tm.net Apr 28 2004, 08:23 AM

i like porn, for awhile at least. it gets very boreing very fast in my opinion. and why the hell do they even try to bother putting in a story.

DIETER:
Hello. Nein dizbatcher says zere
iss problem mit deine kable.

Bunny:
The TV is in here.

DIETER:
Za, okay, I bring mein toolz.

Bunny:
This is my friend Shari. She just came over to use
the shower.


DIETER:
Mein nommen iss Karl. Is hard to
verk in zese clozes--

: Sara Apr 29 2004, 08:26 PM

QUOTE (joseplluissans @ Apr 28 2004, 10:06 PM)
Well, I meant that if there wouldn´t a thing called porn, that doesn´t mean that people wouldn´t post their pictures to others. After all, doesn´t exibitionism mean that a person like´s to show off itself to others?

And me talking about not paying for the porn, meant that I don´t support the industry. I support the idea though. Of course most of the porn actors enjoy what they are doing, I couldn´t imagine myself something I don´t like for a living. You HAVE to be a little into it!

When talking about the freewillingnes (is that a word? Well, you know what I mean), I think that not all are so lucky in terms of choosin freely what they are doing. For example a girl in some third world country doesn´t have too many options (especially if her family have sold her to someone). Selling children to work in the sex industry is a reality in the 21st century.
sad.gif

well exhibionism is a disorder like i said, and it's when one is sexually aroused by exposing one's genitals to a stranger. now in porn, they're not strangers, they are working together, each one knows they're gonna see a cock or what have you.

i dont knwo if they all enjoy it, but i know a lot do it coz it's good money, maybe they dont love it as such, but hey it's good money for them, so im not sure what gives us the right to say well they r not educated enough etc.


i do totally agree with u bout the sextrade and all of that, but i am not addressing those here, i mean this topic is bout porn. in my view, i assumed we were talking legal stuff where consenting adults are involved.


i am against anything that involves children or animals or any form of force used. of course i am against exploitaion of women and men, and forcing men and women to do things they dont wanna do.

: herBeautyhisDefiance May 10 2004, 07:05 AM

I think that porn is a to each his own type of thing. But I do agree with the age limitations for the people in the film. I don't think the porn's with the younger kids is right at all. In fact it's sick.
[QUOTE]There shouldn't be an age limit on when you can look at it, its natural...
Actually porn isn't natural, it's scripted. Just thought I would point that out. Looking at it isn't natural really either, not to all people anyhow. But I really don't have any problem with it. Also, I suppose that it's not degratory to women unless they are unwilling. There are somethings around where the women are forced or conned into it, like this thing my b/f used to watch called like Bang Bus or something. They would totally degrade the women and make them feel like such sluts for doing what they did. I think that's very wrong, but that's just me.

: insurrection May 11 2004, 12:10 PM

QUOTE (herBeautyhisDefiance @ May 10 2004, 03:05 PM)
Also, I suppose that it's not degratory to women unless they are unwilling. There are somethings around where the women are forced or conned into it, like this thing my b/f used to watch called like Bang Bus or something. They would totally degrade the women and make them feel like such sluts for doing what they did. I think that's very wrong, but that's just me.

ohmy.gif thats what i meant lol rolleyes.gif

: Moremi May 14 2004, 02:32 PM

US porn films roll, minus condoms
May 14, 2004 - 12:06PM

Health authorities lamented a decision by California's booming porn industry to film without condoms, despite a spate of HIV infections among its actors.

"I think it is very sad, to resume production as it used to be, without condoms," said Los Angeles County Department of Health Director Jonathan Fielding.

"Condoms are the only way to protect the industry employees and that is what we want, to protect the employees and therefore protect the industry."

The porn industry panic struck in April, when actor Darren James was found to have HIV and filming was stopped for 60 days. Of the 45 actors that had been in scenes with him, three had contracted the virus.

California health authorities attempted to require condom use during filming of explicit sex scenes, as well as frequent checks for HIV, which causes AIDS.

However, the majority of producers called the idea an attack on their business and the quality of the films. Many studios, in San Fernando, north of Los Angeles, said they would simply move from California.

The actors, who shoot as many as five films a day, have already returned to work this week.

"Mandatory condoms are the only way of protection, there is no other way. Frequent tests are not a way of prevention," Fielding said.

Vivid studios has been using condoms for two years.

"It could cost us financially," said Steven Hirsch, owner of Vivid Entertainment.

"There are a lot of people in the US who don't like to watch a movie with condoms, there are people internationally who don't like to watch movies with condoms," he said.

The California industry produces 4,000 films a year and employs 6,000

[ http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/05/14/1084289863989.html ]


: Fanatical Radical May 17 2004, 02:06 AM

I have to side with Sarah here and ask why it is that so many people see porn as degrading? they are in the entertainment industry and have the choice to do it.

The belief that it preys on financially unstable women isn't fair; honestly it gives them an opportunity to make income and the choice is still there own. If they can't afford to do it any other, way then I wouldn't blame the porn industry but instead the government for not offering a student loan or something of that nature.

if I sold drinks on the side of a street surrounded by many parched pedestrians, would I be taking advantage of them? not in my mind.

and i think the same logic could be applied to "all these teen sites".

--------------------------------------------------------

as far as child porn goes it is wrong and should be criminally punishable. same goes for animal porn, though its generally just disgusting and less emotionally traumatizing.

and not everything in the porn industry is fine and dandy. More should be done to protect it from the HIV virus and other STD's and racial steriotypes need to really be downplayed.

: Manifest May 17 2004, 12:19 PM

My buddy's poem

QUOTE
'I Like Snuff'

I like porno
It really gets me hot
"Take three at a time
You little wet slut!"

Snuff Snuff

I like gore
Mutilation, genocide
And world fucking war
Death, entrails, and blood!

Snuff Snuff

Gore and porno
Porno and gore
A year ago I mixed them
And now I want more!
More! More! More!

Snuff Snuff

: señor m Jun 4 2004, 12:56 PM

i need a girl friend to leave pr0n...

i hate wierd, fetish.. wicked pron... there are a lot of weird dudes out there...

i just wacht pron cus i havent see a nyude woman live..., and sometimes..like right now, i feel really bad , cus this is sick, nodoubt about it... i dont need a woman to swallow it..i need a woman who loves me.. thats what im looking for... my soul mate, not a sexual slave...

but my hormones need sexual release... and it looks that my first tinme its far far away..maybe im ugly XD

i really rspect women.. but i need to emulete a sexual raliton, i dunno why... am i a FREAk..

yes...i am cry.gif

: Turd Ferguson Jun 4 2004, 01:36 PM

^ you're not a freak. It's just that this modern society induces inadvertant self-loathing....a feeling of being inadequate.

console.gif

: señor m Jun 4 2004, 01:47 PM

so its fine if i watch pron?
but i dont feel bad cus the society says: Look a perv!!, im worried cus i have no relations with women, i have some femlae friends, but i dont have romantic relations...
and im also worried cus i dont want to watch pron the rest of my life

damn... i feel weird talking about this ermm.gif

: Turd Ferguson Jun 4 2004, 08:36 PM

QUOTE (señor m @ Jun 4 2004, 02:47 PM)
so its fine if i watch pron?
but i dont feel bad cus the society says: Look a perv!!, im worried cus i have no relations with women, i have some femlae friends, but i dont have romantic relations...
and im also worried cus i dont want to watch pron the rest of my life

damn... i feel weird talking about this ermm.gif

Trust me, there really IS someone for everyone. I used to have that mindset too.....until I realized that if you worry too much about something petty like having sexual relations with the opposite sex, it won't happen, because you would be way too driven (not to mention unecessarily stressed) just to meet that ideal. Don't wrack your brain doing that; you could be doing something more productive, like learning how to cook a 5-course meal, for example.

Be patient, you're not gonna be watching porn for the rest of your life. wink.gif Believe me, it does get old after a while.... laugh.gif

: Radisshu Jun 6 2004, 04:23 AM

Yeah well, young people like myself are sorta - in some weird way - encouraged to watch it nowadays, since everyone thinks we do. And who are the most frequent viewers of it, younger or older?

..

I don't wanna pay!



And furthermore, I guess porn's less arousing when you've actually has sex and knows what it's like (and that it probably isn't like porn).

: Renegades Jun 6 2004, 06:08 AM

I saw this underground American film a while back about this man who marries a woman and doesn't know of her 'pornographic' years, until they travel back to her hometown years later. It's an interesting movie actually, it's more about the husband's psychological side; like how he comes to deal with it. I'd recromend seeing it if you can - it's called "Snakes and Ladders". wink.gif

On my own personal view of porn... I suppose anything in excess is a bad thing... wink.gif

: Stigmata Jun 17 2004, 02:30 PM

i dont care much one way or the other about pornography rights and regulations but it does give you the wrong impression about sex and romance. For those who are more "experianced" this does not apply, but to those hormone filled younens out there, porn as a very mind twisting effect; it tells them that they need certain abilities to satisfy orale.gif

: lemming Jun 18 2004, 12:07 AM

QUOTE (Sarah @ Apr 23 2004, 04:33 AM)
it is beyond me why it's degrading to women but not men...it's not ok to have nude women but ok to have nude men? why is it degrading to women when women have sex with men for it to be viewed by ppl? is it because it becomes public or like are you guys against the act of sex itself?

Because women can have kids and men cannot, women are seen as more holy, not very men are into having a "whore" for a wife, and the cock(a negitive word) as you say, goes into the women which is more intimate for the girl, I think thats why more women feel a need to have a emotional attachment to a guy to enjoy it. Like blood injected into your body then, just on your skin. And thats why men are viewed as scumbags who soil women.

: Sara Jun 18 2004, 01:56 AM

QUOTE (lemming @ Jun 18 2004, 08:07 PM)
Because women can have kids and men cannot, women are seen as more holy, not very men are into having a "whore" for a wife, and the cock(a negitive word) as you say, goes into the women which is more intimate for the girl, I think thats why more women feel a need to have a emotional attachment to a guy to enjoy it. Like blood injected into your body then, just on your skin. And thats why men are viewed as scumbags who soil women.

is that what you actually think? smile.gif

i am aware of those contradictions and those ideas, but they mean shit to me. they are patriarchal notions imposed on us to keep women under control. smile.gif

not every woman needs to be emotionally attached to the man she fucks, and not every man is ok with not being emotionally attached to the woman he fucks. that is what the media chooses to tell us, and that is what we are being taught, i personally don't agree with that. i dont think it's an innate thing women exhibit.

and as for men being scumbags or whatever, i wont even comment on that. that's a joke. blackhair.gif

: You are not a slave. Jun 18 2004, 02:19 AM

QUOTE
that is what the media chooses to tell us, and that is what we are being taught, i personally don't agree with that. i dont think it's an innate thing women exhibit.


Fuck, everything comes from the media, I thought we already figured this out?


All your attractions come from the media. Do you like thin women with big breasts? Well that's because they(magazines, tv shows, EVERYTHING!) tell you that's what's attractive, and you believe it.

It's all state of mind. Westernization.

: Sara Jun 18 2004, 02:49 AM

QUOTE (You are not a slave. @ Jun 18 2004, 10:19 PM)
QUOTE
that is what the media chooses to tell us, and that is what we are being taught, i personally don't agree with that. i dont think it's an innate thing women exhibit.


Fuck, everything comes from the media, I thought we already figured this out?


All your attractions come from the media. Do you like thin women with big breasts? Well that's because they(magazines, tv shows, EVERYTHING!) tell you that's what's attractive, and you believe it.

It's all state of mind. Westernization.

that's not what i was talking bout. and i dont agree with everything said in that statement.

: lemming Jun 18 2004, 09:35 AM

I'd hate to say it but the christians are right when they say this stuff is fucking up society. Not that I think there should be any law against it besides to protect children but that it creates a lack of respect for your fellow human beings which leads to other things.

QUOTE
not every woman needs to be emotionally attached to the man she fucks, and not every man is ok with not being emotionally attached to the woman he fucks


But thats very small minority, like porno, the women fake orgasms and the women wears his on her face.

Do you think its any worse to punch a girl then a guy if you're a man? Because even if its beating up someone weaker than you but are they not equals?

As for the media, the free media mostly represent the peoples views. We are all brainwashed by other people, we have no views that havn't came from something or someone, but that doesn't make them not right.

: RATMROXMYSOX Jun 18 2004, 11:27 AM

^Interesting sig lemming. hmm.gif I think that pornography is something that is pleasurable to watch but just try to keep it out of children's hands until they are old enough to steal it from their brother. wink.gif

: Weatherhuman Jun 18 2004, 12:23 PM

Pornography, most people probably think they know how I feel about this and many other subjects. But I actually have a more liberal approach to this one. I think pornography is good, but only for keeping kids out of difficult situations. What I mean by this is that if porn were to be celebrated’ as it should then maybe there wouldn’t be as many teen pregnancies. I don’t knot though, this could backfire. Also bestiality should be outlawed and other forms of sex. -Cesar


HAS ANYONE ELSE HEARD ABOUT THIS?
I heard about a place where they teach girls to give “oral sex”, this was done to prevent pregnancy. If you ask me I think it’s sick, both oral sex and it’s teaching.

: lemming Jun 18 2004, 12:42 PM

If you fuck a girl for the pussy, whats the difference from fucking a goat for the pussy? I don't think it should be illegal because animals are always consenting.

: RATMROXMYSOX Jun 18 2004, 12:43 PM

QUOTE (lemming @ Jun 18 2004, 08:42 PM)
If you fuck a girl for the pussy, whats the difference from fucking a goat for the pussy? I don't think it should be illegal because animals are always consenting.

Eww...would you want to have a half human-half goat baby? huh.gif

: lemming Jun 18 2004, 01:01 PM

No but there was half human/ape.

: RATMROXMYSOX Jun 18 2004, 01:30 PM

QUOTE (lemming @ Jun 18 2004, 09:01 PM)
No but there was half human/ape.

And you agree w/ that?

: Weatherhuman Jun 18 2004, 01:50 PM

So do you enjoy bestiality? This is a serious question. -Cesar

: RATMROXMYSOX Jun 18 2004, 02:14 PM

Eww...I think this is for the Sex thread...but um no. Bestiality is wrong in my opinion. A 1/2 human 1/2 ape? C'mon. That's just wrong.

: Weatherhuman Jun 19 2004, 05:21 PM

Just wondering how can you even say that sex with animals is acceptable? Their animals for God’s sake. -Cesar

: lemming Jun 19 2004, 10:55 PM

QUOTE
So do you enjoy bestiality?


I find it funny that you implied that I've fucked another animal outside my species. Anyways. Are we not animals? Don't you belive in darwinism? I just don't see the point of meaningless sex its just another way of getting high which just makes them a tool which is a just a object.

http://www.anus.com/tuc/tuc1/4.html don't worry its not porno.

Oh yea, my view on pr0n, goth lesbians.

: ragingagainst101 Jun 20 2004, 04:59 AM

QUOTE (lemming @ Jun 18 2004, 09:01 PM)
No but there was half human/ape.

are you talking about the humanzee?? i heard about that thing, it was supposed to look like an ape but it had the whites in their eyes like humans.. blink.gif

: lemming Jun 20 2004, 01:26 PM

It also walked upright and only attracted to humans.

http://www.rotten.com/library/cryptozoology/humanzee/

: Weatherhuman Jun 20 2004, 04:59 PM

I never implied that you had relations with another animal, I was simply asking you if wheater you enjoyed that type of pornography. To answer your other question yes we all are animals, but you have to draw a line somewhere. Your having sex with a dog, it’s a dog for goodness sake, I mean what’s next… As for Social Darwinism; I do not believe in anything he or people like Sigmund Freud have “established”. They base their findings on friggin Australian tribes and incest dreads. Maybe some people’s ancestors came from monkeys but not mine. -Cesar

-I really shouldn’t be talking about something like this, so I think I’ll stop now. Please don’t take what I’ve said in a bad way, this is just my opinion.

: zapatista Jun 20 2004, 09:41 PM

First. Off topic.

Second... Darwinism has nothing to do with humans having sex with primates. Tho there are many modern examples of hybridization in nature, some forced, some natural. Mules are bred by humans from horses and donkeys, are completely sterile, and represent an evolutionary dead-end. The only place it has EVER worked is with plants... species-crossings that do just fine, such as offspring of the notoriously promiscuous oak tree species, which hybridize so often species-namers commonly joke about not being able to keep up.

Still, cross-species matings usually result in sickness or sterility, if the offspring get that far -- many naturally abort. Hybrid offspring that are fertile but sick or weak will not be able to compete with the purer offspring of either parent in passing on their genes to future generations. As a result, many evolutionary biologists have thought hybridization to be evolutionarily unimportant.

So, please, cut it with the half ape/man fucking goats shit.

In this thread anyway. blackhair.gif

: IndicaRain Jun 20 2004, 09:50 PM

QUOTE (zapatista @ Jun 21 2004, 09:41 AM)
Darwinism has nothing to do with humans having sex with primates.

laugh.gif Too right.

: lemming Jun 21 2004, 10:31 AM

No but it does make it more on the way to being acceptable then if we are made in gods image, because in the Christian world we are totally separate from animals, then as in Darwin's world in which we all came from a single cell organism.

: Sara Jun 21 2004, 11:42 PM

yep stay on topic please.

: Fanatical Radical Jul 9 2004, 11:17 PM

I agree with lemming: it is disgusting that they were/are teaching girls how to preform oral sex to avoid teen pregnancy. How about instead teaching them the risks and responsibilities that come with being sexually active, to respect thier bodies, and how to say "no"...



offtopic: I have Started a thread to talk about http://www.zdlr.net/board/index.php?showtopic=8096. so you can continue to discuss that without dragging this thread offtopic.

: zapatista Jul 10 2004, 01:18 AM

How about teaching guys not to paw all over you all the time and always be thinking about getting in your pants.

: Fanatical Radical Jul 10 2004, 01:44 AM

QUOTE(zapatista @ Jul 10 2004, 09:18 AM)
How about teaching guys not to paw all over you all the time and always be thinking about getting in your pants.
[right][snapback]119118[/snapback][/right]


I didn't mean that like women should only be responsible. I meant that teaching women how to give oral sex to avoid pregnancy doesn't teach them to respect their bodies or that its their right to decide when they're ready.

Teaching girls about oral sex would also act negatively in a same way prohibition did: A man looking to get alcohol would place himself in a position where he is more likely to get invovled with deeper crime, and a girl preforming sexual actions would place herself into a position where she is more likely to preform other sexual actions. hope that made sense.



they should teach boys about the republican parties plans to make all guys pay child support for children and the financial slavery that can cause. wink.gif

: lemming Jul 10 2004, 10:46 PM

Porno to to partly to blame with all the men beating their meat like monkeys getting high on whatever hormone makes men act like fools around the opposite sex. Which prolongs men from getting in touch with their feelings. Which is the only way to love another human being is loving yourself on a level more than superficial.

: You are not a slave. Jul 10 2004, 10:48 PM

^That was beautiful. laugh.gif

: Intrepid_one Jul 19 2004, 08:03 PM

I honestly did not really know how to reply to this thread......

I don't see anything wrong with porn, strait, gay whatever. If its all taken in fun and not too seriously. As long as it does not include minors or animals. That it just inconceivably wrong. zmat2.gif

I do agree that it may have a profound affect on the way some people view or treat women. We have enough pre-conceived notions to struggle with on a daily basis as it is. Sex is everywhere though, i'm seriously immune to seeing anything explicit i think.



: jorgeimontoya Jul 19 2004, 08:14 PM

Porno is addictive,

Its nice to watch but it is mind numbing

You can't be a productive person if you are addicted to "choking the Chicken"

Pornogarher are very exploitive people

they are the pusher and pimps and its legal


makes you think about what it would be like to legalize Igeal drugs

I mean we would start up an industry that would probaly be much worst the the porno industry?

well

whatever

: Intrepid_one Jul 19 2004, 08:42 PM

Are you making a business proposal?


just playin. tongue.gif

: reapiswhatyousow Jul 19 2004, 10:25 PM

its art

: Mushroom Aug 5 2004, 12:12 PM

QUOTE(RATMROXMYSOX @ Mar 22 2004, 04:10 AM)
porn is so funny. the "plots" are so dumb, it's hard not to laugh.
[right][snapback]83459[/snapback][/right]


you're right. i think its so odd and unrealistic.

you cant match normal "love" with pornography. so you wont find me watching porno.

: freedom_mumia Aug 5 2004, 04:24 PM

Seen one they are pretty stupid and there no point.


QUOTE
you cant match normal "love" with pornography. so you wont find me watching porno.


good choice

: lemming Aug 5 2004, 07:11 PM

normal love is porno, not a bed full of roses.

: insurrection Aug 19 2004, 01:16 AM

just listening to some bill hicks (comedian) a lil while ago (guy in the aenima liner notes. if you dont know what this means dont worry about it)
anyway, he made an interesting point, about what exactly porn is. the supreme court defines it as "anything that elicits sexual thought and has no artistic merit."
well, like bill said, that sounds like most commercials on tv these days.

: Acelord Aug 19 2004, 04:24 AM

I had a teacher once who was the smartest, most intelligent, knowledgeable, honest, open-minded, cool, respectable, nice, kind, funny, sarcastic, democratic guy I ever knew. And with all these qualities to him he found porn(not hustler material mind you)to be quite artistic. The reason I tell you this is because i looked up to the guy so much and it just surprised me that a guy like that, felt the way he did.

: insurrection Aug 21 2004, 04:20 PM

i dont really get why some people call porn art...
its not art, its getting off. not really that hard to understand imo :|

: Sara Jul 4 2005, 09:54 PM

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 5 2005, 03:51 AM)
oh i get it sara, you don't find that stuff degrading...that's why there's so many drugs in that trade.... cos they really enjoy it...right.  that explains it, sorry to misinterpret you.
[right][snapback]181381[/snapback][/right]



so? drugs are everywhere. ALOT of ppl in the music industry do drugs and enjoy it dunno.gif doesn't make music degrading... unsure.gif

: Lostphoenix Jul 4 2005, 10:49 PM

people in that industry take drugs to numb their feelings, not to have a good time,you can see plenty people in amsterdam working in sex industry-not just prostitution but people who work in the trade your talking about, they aren't happy, never seen happy one. they're saving money and hoping for the day they can give it up, surely you wanna give up job, you 'enjoy' lmao... friend of mine spent a night with one of them, the girl was crying on his shoulder all night, that's how happy that industry makes you...well, if you think they enjoy it, go on believing that.

: Sara Jul 5 2005, 03:36 AM

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 5 2005, 06:49 PM)
people in that industry take drugs to numb their feelings, not to have a good time,you can see plenty people in amsterdam working in sex industry-not just prostitution but people who work in the trade your talking about, they aren't happy, never seen happy one. they're saving money and hoping for the day they can give it up, surely you wanna give up job, you 'enjoy' lmao... friend of mine spent a night with one of them, the girl was crying on his shoulder all night, that's how happy that industry makes you...well, if you think they enjoy it, go on believing that.
[right][snapback]181466[/snapback][/right]


ok to avoid any confusion... are you saying that you think the industry is degrading because you have spoken to some sex workers in amsterdam who take drugs to numb their feelings, and that they are not happy being prostitutes?

and where did i say that prostitutes enjoy being prostitutes? blink.gif

: Lostphoenix Jul 5 2005, 05:23 AM

no, i am not basing my knowledge on just them, but also on what i know of the industry, one of the people i know is a journalist who had to do research on that. the who controls who goes for both industries, porn industry and prostitution do have links. their not as innocently divorced from each other, as it would like to be thinked about. and exploitation goes in both.and what employment rights and protection do those people have to enjoy?, so they often get treated as piece of shit, unless they're 'lucky' usually that 'luck' is brought by sleeping with the 'right' person, ie person with some more power then you. its not just drugs to numb your own feelings, guys often have to take some shit to keep their erection - do you think every person you're Told to fuck (=not your own choice) turns you on? no. in normal sex life you choose whom you do things with and what you do with that person, its mutual understanding, there what choice have you got? you can walk out of that job- if the setting is bit more dirt shite with pigs in charge, who quckly remind you who's the boss there, but it pays for your food, shelter and what you need. and also do you think these guys don't long to have loving relationship? now how is that possible for them....they gotta be lucky to find a partner who will not mind the open relationship and what they're partner does for the living... would you like your partner to fuck some for money?

: Sara Jul 7 2005, 12:33 AM

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 6 2005, 01:23 AM)
and what employment rights and protection do those people have to enjoy?, so they often get treated as piece of shit, unless they're 'lucky' usually that 'luck' is brought by sleeping with the 'right' person, ie person with some more power then you. 
[right][snapback]181485[/snapback][/right]

so we need better enforcement of the law. this can only happen if we accept porn. i mean the reason why they get so much shit is because it's so underground. these things have to be done following strict laws. that may not eliminate the problem, but it certainly will make things better for the workers/actors. legalising prostitution in new zealand certainly has made things better for sex workers. there is exploitation and there are ppl who are in it for the wrong reasons, and those need help. they need better benefit programmes and so forth. that does not make the porn industry degrading, however.
QUOTE
its not just drugs to numb your own feelings, guys often have to take some shit to keep their erection - do you think every person you're Told to fuck (=not your own choice) turns you on? no. in normal sex life you choose whom you do things with and what you do with that person, its mutual understanding, there what choice have you got?

are you saying that taking drugs to numb one's feelings or to enhance one's performance make porn degrading...?

you are told to fuck that person coz it's part of the job. having sex in porn movies is a performance, it's not a matter of gaining personal pleasure. porn actors are aware that it's not a matter of choosing their co actors. it's a performance. it cannot be compared to what u call a "normal sex life", or even a "sick sex life". there r no grounds for comparison. its not bout getting turned on and orgasming (thu i am sure it'd be a bonus), it's a job that's got to be done. and having no choice in who u have sex with on a porn set does not make porn degrading.

QUOTE
and also do you think these guys don't long to have loving relationship? now how is that possible for them....they gotta be lucky to find a partner who will not mind the open relationship and what they're partner does for the living... would you like your partner to fuck some for money?


if the porn actor cannot get a girlfriend who will accept that he is a porn actor then the problem is not in porn. she can't accept it, it's her. and there's nothing wrong with that. i wouldn't go out with a porn actor, but that doesn't make porn degrading. it just means i would not go out with a guy who's a porn actor. others would thu. and if the porn actor finds it impossible to find a gf coz no one would date him coz of his profession then he needs to make a choice.

there is a need to have better laws to protect the workers. getting into porn and prostitution should be a matter of choice. we need to look out for the ones who are vulnerable to exploitation and protect them. society needs to do a little more for the needy and the poor. but there r ppl out there who r doing it coz they want to. i've read interviews with sex workers and porn actoresses before... the ones i've read like it. it's a job and they said they enjoy the money and they r not intrested in a 9-5 job. why should we look at them as victims who are being degraded?

: insurrection Jul 7 2005, 01:25 AM

QUOTE(Sara @ Jul 7 2005, 04:33 AM)
QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 6 2005, 01:23 AM)
and what employment rights and protection do those people have to enjoy?, so they often get treated as piece of shit, unless they're 'lucky' usually that 'luck' is brought by sleeping with the 'right' person, ie person with some more power then you. 
[right][snapback]181485[/snapback][/right]

so we need better enforcement of the law. this can only happen if we accept porn. i mean the reason why they get so much shit is because it's so underground. these things have to be done following strict laws. that may not eliminate the problem, but it certainly will make things better for the workers/actors. legalising prostitution in new zealand certainly has made things better for sex workers. there is exploitation and there are ppl who are in it for the wrong reasons, and those need help. they need better benefit programmes and so forth. that does not make the porn industry degrading, however.
[right][snapback]181697[/snapback][/right]


This is a good point. I guess it is reasonable to argue that it is more capitalism/inequality as a whole that is degrading than specifically the porn industry. If it were by the actors' free choice that they were participating in it (i.e. not being coerced physically or economically) then I think it would be much harder to make the case that it is degrading. And if the case is made well, one wonders whether it matters (a contentious claim, but something worth discussion at least), as people should be free to do these things if it is actually what they want (as discussed above).
However, this conclusion does not address the question of the effects on the viewer, so perhaps it should be trashed anyway.

: Sara Jul 7 2005, 01:47 AM

QUOTE(insurrection @ Jul 7 2005, 09:25 PM)
However, this conclusion does not address the question of the effects on the viewer, so perhaps it should be trashed anyway.
[right][snapback]181700[/snapback][/right]


what effects? (this is not rhetorical by the way...)

: Lostphoenix Jul 7 2005, 05:14 AM

if you take away the economical reasons, i would find that minimum of 80% of the people will not be in that industry.

if you enjoy something you don't need to paint a better mood over it by taking drugs. a lot of them feel degraded in their job.... but i guess they're just delluded, they only do it and take shit amount of drugs just to make themselves go thru with it because 'they enjoy it'.

i think you really need to meet some of these people sara and do some research to find that your 'they enjoy' if it is reality of the people or what you'd like to have as a nice picture of that industry. i mean if its not degrading, why don't you actually go for it?

: defiance Jul 7 2005, 12:02 PM

QUOTE(Sara @ Jul 7 2005, 03:33 AM)
you are told to fuck that person coz it's part of the job. having sex in porn movies is a performance, it's not a matter of gaining personal pleasure. porn actors are aware that it's not a matter of choosing their co actors. it's a performance. it cannot be compared to what u call a "normal sex life", or even a "sick sex life". there r no grounds for comparison. its not bout getting turned on and orgasming (thu i am sure it'd be a bonus), it's a job that's got to be done. and having no choice in who u have sex with on a porn set does not make porn degrading.
[right][snapback]181697[/snapback][/right]

That's just the thing, you see: it's an industry that turns something that should be a matter of mutual love and relationship into a public entertainment industry. People who see no problem with pornography should also have no problem if their girlfriend/boyfriend/spouse was sleepingaround with other people all the time. After all, it's just for fun, right? So tell me what's wrogn with that? Or perhaps you don't believe there is anything wrong with it. Maybe you're one of those "total free love" people, who thinks it's normal. If that's the case, then I won't even bother debating this with you, cause I know it would be pointless, and I wouldn't be able to really respect your opinion at all.

: Holter Jul 7 2005, 12:41 PM

QUOTE(defiance @ Jul 7 2005, 01:02 PM)
That's just the thing, you see: it's an industry that turns something that should be a matter of mutual love and relationship into a public entertainment industry. People who see no problem with pornography should also have no problem if their girlfriend/boyfriend/spouse was sleepingaround with other people all the time. After all, it's just for fun, right? So tell me what's wrogn with that? Or perhaps you don't believe there is anything wrong with it. Maybe you're one of those "total free love" people, who thinks it's normal. If that's the case, then I won't even bother debating this with you, cause I know it would be pointless, and I wouldn't be able to really respect your opinion at all.
[right][snapback]181770[/snapback][/right]


Well then you may as well just consider anytime that actors kiss to be the same, i mean if you have no problem with actors kissing in a drama, than surely you have no problem with your significant other going around kissing anyone. I dont think your logic holds any water here, because this is simply this persons job, and I for one have met many pornstars at bars living in california - there is a bar by my buddy's place that hosts a karaoke night where a bunch of local porn stars meet up to drink and sing. They all seem like pretty nice, happy people. I dont see why people make it a major issue, when if you just dont pay attention to porn, its not harming you. And i think you know im not a "total free love" person - I just dont see why people make it an issue like this. Its not your life, your not the one who is in these movies, and like it or not it provides a ton of jobs and money to people - and im not just talking about the actors. But if you look down on other peoples professions so closeminded and harshly, then i dont really respect your opinion at all.

QUOTE
if you take away the economical reasons, i would find that minimum of 80% of the people will not be in that industry.


Id say thats a pretty safe bet with pretty much any industry.

QUOTE
if you enjoy something you don't need to paint a better mood over it by taking drugs. a lot of them feel degraded in their job.... but i guess they're just delluded, they only do it and take shit amount of drugs just to make themselves go thru with it because 'they enjoy it'.


I know, seriously. I mean who the fuck are these musicians who take drugs and stuff, and then use that to propell their work...wait - i forgot. We were talking about porn stars here, not musicians. What is this forum about again? a musician? hmmm... Maybe that comment of yours was a bit of a generalization, no? I mean you cant honestly think that all porn stars are doped up, and numb to reality. I certainly dont think that about all musicians, but im sure there are a lot who do use drugs.

: defiance Jul 7 2005, 10:40 PM

QUOTE(Holter @ Jul 7 2005, 03:41 PM)
Well then you may as well just consider anytime that actors kiss to be the same, i mean if you have no problem with actors kissing in a drama, than surely you have no problem with your significant other going around kissing anyone.  I dont think your logic holds any water here, because this is simply this persons job, and I for one have met many pornstars at bars living in california - there is a bar by my buddy's place that hosts a karaoke night where a bunch of local porn stars meet up to drink and sing.  They all seem like pretty nice, happy people.  I dont see why people make it a major issue, when if you just dont pay attention to porn, its not harming you.  And i think you know im not a "total free love" person - I just dont see why people make it an issue like this.  Its not your life, your not the one who is in these movies, and like it or not it provides a ton of jobs and money to people - and im not just talking about the actors.  But if you look down on other peoples professions so closeminded and harshly, then i dont really respect your opinion at all.
[right][snapback]181780[/snapback][/right]

It's not thesame at all. Yeah, I wouldn't feel very comfortable having my girlfriend kissing some other guy, but... well, it's not the same, you know. I'm sure I don't need to elaborate about the quite substantial difference between kissing and having sex. I guess some might say my view is "arbitrary" or something, but anyone with a working brain can figure out the difference, and in my view, that difference is crucial.

And also, I have also heard before about what Lostphoenix is talking about, how it is very miserable for the actors, and also very unhealthy. I have heard that AIDS and other STDs are rampant among porn actors.

Let me ask you Holter: do you think prostitution is okay too? You say you can't respect my opinion very much when I'm "closeminded and harsh" about somebody's job; but would you say that about prostitution as well? Or at least for single people? It's okay for them, right? By your standards it should be, anyway.

: Lostphoenix Jul 7 2005, 11:03 PM

i'm talking about the majority holter, i'm obviously not talking about gwen stefani who might have liked being in porn movies (she was heh), i'm talking about those whom their job makes unhappy.

its quite unlikely to go out with brad pitt, so his kissing some actress would not disturb me, but i may come across somebody who is involved with porn industry. if one does not want to be involved in open relationship, it's not a personal fault. but there's a word as commitment...

: Holter Jul 7 2005, 11:04 PM

QUOTE(defiance @ Jul 7 2005, 11:40 PM)
It's not thesame at all. Yeah, I wouldn't feel very comfortable having my girlfriend kissing some other guy, but... well, it's not the same, you know. I'm sure I don't need to elaborate about the quite substantial difference between kissing and having sex. I guess some might say my view is "arbitrary" or something, but anyone with a working brain can figure out the difference, and in my view, that difference is crucial.


Actually, i think most women i have talked to say that a kiss is more intimate to them than having sex is. But even ignoring that, it really isnt different at all. Its still a "matter of mutual love and relationship" just like sex is. I mean, by the way you describe this whole thing, being a porn star is as awful as a one night fling. Oh and my brain works just fine cool.gif

QUOTE
And also, I have also heard before about what Lostphoenix is talking about, how it is very miserable for the actors, and also very unhealthy. I have heard that AIDS and other STDs are rampant among porn actors.


Well from what ive heard, porn stars are required to have regular blood and urine samples for disease checks. But i dont necessarily read up on this stuff.

QUOTE
Let me ask you Holter: do you think prostitution is okay too? You say you can't respect my opinion very much when I'm "closeminded and harsh" about somebody's job; but would you say that about prostitution as well? Or at least for single people? It's okay for them, right? By your standards it should be, anyway.
[right][snapback]181813[/snapback][/right]


My position is and always will be that they can do what they would like to do. Im not here to tell you who you can and cannot have sex with, that would mean that I think of myself higher than i do someone else, which i dont. Do i think prostitution is a bad thing? Sure. Do i think prostitutes are bad people? No. Would i ever get a prostitute? Nope. Prostitution happens to be outlawed in the US, except for parts - but its also the one of the worlds oldest professions(so ive been told). I assume that you are leading this down to, "well they both get paid for having sex" and thats true. So how exactly is it different? Is that what you want to talk about?

And when i say that I cant respect your opinion, its basically because you dont seem to respect the people we are talking about and their way of life, which is a chosen profession. I dont want to hear some BS about they had to become a porn star, thats bullshit. I want to make it clear that I respect the fact that these people chose that as their profession, you dont seem to, and for that I dont respect your opinion. People that constantly look down on others I could really give two shits about. In fact, the only time i really act like an asshole in public or on a forum is when i see someone treating another as a less than equal. So if you think you are better than someone else, then i dont like you.

: Holter Jul 7 2005, 11:11 PM

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 8 2005, 12:03 AM)
i'm talking about the majority holter, i'm obviously not talking about gwen stefani who might have liked being in porn movies (she was heh), i'm talking about those whom their job makes unhappy.
[right][snapback]181814[/snapback][/right]


But that is still the same. What if Gwen Stefani hated making her shitty music? And next year people just up and stop paying for music, or her career as an entertainer fails to bring her adequate compensation? I would think she would move along to something else, wouldnt you? I mean for most people their job is just a means to an end, a way to make money to live how they want to - at least it is for the people you are describing here. Obviously you think these people hate what they are doing, so if they were to be paid far less, they would stop right? Wouldnt that be the same for a guy who drives a Semi for a living - driving his truck around the country bringing god knows what for $.43 / mile - which all the sudden stops paying so well because air freight becomes the new and easier shipping method? Air frieght takes so much business that his company starts to pay him only $.15 / mile - and he hated his job to begin with, he would leave no?

Im just trying to point out that a negative change in income would effectively push out the majority of unhappy workers in any industry, not just the porn industry.

: Lostphoenix Jul 7 2005, 11:15 PM

can you tell me where defiance is saying that porn actors are scum? or that they are all bad people? he's not.



if somebody is happy to do it, there's no quarel with that, but a lot of people are not and that's those that are talked about. but i'd be happier if that industry was more humane and provided some security and people didn't get treated as scum...as i said i knew a journalist who had done a lot of research into this

and do you think all porn movies are sex, they'd normally go for? some of them are pretty disgusting and don't tell me they chose it...that's bullshit, its accomodating people who happen to like to watch that stuff.

blood and urine tests do show you when you've hit the STD, they're not preventive of it.

wow, what a great excuse to be an asshole btw.

: Holter Jul 7 2005, 11:28 PM

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 8 2005, 12:15 AM)
can you tell me where defiance is saying that porn actors are scum? or that they are all bad people? he's not.


sure. but to be clear, i never said that defiance said that porn stars are scum. Iexplained to him that if cant respect someone who "thinks it's normal", it being pornogrophy.

QUOTE(defiance @ Jul 8 2005, 1:02 AM)
People who see no problem with pornography should also have no problem if their girlfriend/boyfriend/spouse was sleepingaround with other people all the time. After all, it's just for fun, right? So tell me what's wrogn with that? Or perhaps you don't believe there is anything wrong with it. Maybe you're one of those "total free love" people, who thinks it's normal. If that's the case, then I won't even bother debating this with you, cause I know it would be pointless, and I wouldn't be able to really respect your opinion at all.


**************************

QUOTE
if somebody is happy to do it, there's no quarel with that


Agreed.

QUOTE
and do you think all porn movies are sex, they'd normally go for? some of them are pretty disgusting and don't tell me they chose it...that's bullshit, its accomodating people who happen to like to watch that stuff.


I wouldnt say they choose it, but i would say they agree to do it. Its not like "someone is holding a gun to their head".

QUOTE
wow, what a great excuse to be an asshole btw.
[right][snapback]181817[/snapback][/right]


Thanks. You deserve it.

: Lostphoenix Jul 7 2005, 11:37 PM

there is a difference between not respecting opinion and not respecting person, while defiance means opinion and not person, you go childishly, 'i won't like you'.
if one disagrees with somebody's opinion and can't respect it, doesn't mean he's putting himself above them, its just he can't find common ground in that resepct.


that you think that people deserve your asshole behaviour is stupid, but maybe its time you directed it on male member that qualifies to your meter whom youre gonna be an asshole to since you don't seem to have many ways to vent your frustrations,to show some balls at least.

: Holter Jul 7 2005, 11:50 PM

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 8 2005, 12:37 AM)
there is a difference between not respecting opinion and not respecting person, while defiance means opinion and not person, you go childishly, 'i won't like you'.
if one disagrees with somebody's opinion and can't respect it, doesn't mean he's putting himself above them, its just he can't find common ground in that resepct.


My statement saying, "then i wont like you" wasnt directed at defiance, it was directed at people who "constantly look down on others", which he doesnt. I dont respect his opinion on this matter at all, and i wasnt trying to be an asshole to him ever.

QUOTE
that you think that people deserve your asshole behaviour is stupid, but maybe its time you directed it on male member that qualifies to your meter whom youre gonna be an asshole to since you don't seem to have many ways to vent your frustrations,to show some balls at least.
[right][snapback]181821[/snapback][/right]


oh so women arent up to par? is that what your saying? Ill remember you said that.

You can keep on trying to tell people what to do, trying to tell me that i should act this way, or telling people that they should really look at themselves first, or do more research if they are going to argue with someone since you seem to be so perfect and all-knowledgeable - but im really fine with who i am. I actually think I am a pretty agreeable person, as do most people that know me.

now i need to go figure out a way to show my balls so that i can earn your respect, your majesty.

Werent we talking about the porn industry? How all of the sudden did i start to be told "im doing this wrong" or "i shouldnt say that" or "you should act this way"

I think ill choose to talk about the topic in this thread in future posts, instead of talking with you about how I should be.

: insurrection Jul 8 2005, 12:31 AM

QUOTE(Sara @ Jul 7 2005, 05:47 AM)
QUOTE(insurrection @ Jul 7 2005, 09:25 PM)
However, this conclusion does not address the question of the effects on the viewer, so perhaps it should be trashed anyway.
[right][snapback]181700[/snapback][/right]


what effects? (this is not rhetorical by the way...)
[right][snapback]181702[/snapback][/right]


According to a review of studies of effects on adult males in the April 1992 Canadian Journal of Criminology:
QUOTE
The focus of the report is mainly on the impact of pornography on adult males, with respect to sexual aggression towards adult females. Selected for comment are that are cited most frequently in the literature as landmark studies that address a link between pornography and its presumed harmful effects. ... Psychologically, there remains confirmation that harms arising from pornography are mainly attitudinal and appear to result in aggression very rarely, except in those men already predisposed to view women negatively.


The link between pornography and aggression is contentious, and there haven't been any solid conclusions reached. However, it is interesting to note the attitudinal effects.

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 7 2005, 09:14 AM)
if you take away the economical reasons, i would find that minimum of 80% of the people will not be in that industry.

if you enjoy something you don't need to paint a better mood over it by taking drugs. a lot of them feel degraded in their job.... but i guess they're just delluded, they only do it and take shit amount of drugs just to make themselves go thru with it because 'they enjoy it'. 
...[right][snapback]181713[/snapback][/right]


The same is true of any wage slave. People may not take drugs while doing their jobs, but many take drugs or otherwise numb themselves to reality. Television, movies, computer gaming, internet and drugs are all forms of escapism. This is not exactly unique to the industry. It is an indication of a problem that is with the economic system as a whole, not just the porn industry.

QUOTE(defiance @ Jul 7 2005, 04:02 PM)
QUOTE(Sara @ Jul 7 2005, 03:33 AM)
you are told to fuck that person coz it's part of the job. having sex in porn movies is a performance, it's not a matter of gaining personal pleasure. porn actors are aware that it's not a matter of choosing their co actors. it's a performance. it cannot be compared to what u call a "normal sex life", or even a "sick sex life". there r no grounds for comparison. its not bout getting turned on and orgasming (thu i am sure it'd be a bonus), it's a job that's got to be done. and having no choice in who u have sex with on a porn set does not make porn degrading.
[right][snapback]181697[/snapback][/right]

That's just the thing, you see: it's an industry that turns something that should be a matter of mutual love and relationship into a public entertainment industry. People who see no problem with pornography should also have no problem if their girlfriend/boyfriend/spouse was sleepingaround with other people all the time. After all, it's just for fun, right? So tell me what's wrogn with that? Or perhaps you don't believe there is anything wrong with it. Maybe you're one of those "total free love" people, who thinks it's normal. If that's the case, then I won't even bother debating this with you, cause I know it would be pointless, and I wouldn't be able to really respect your opinion at all.
[right][snapback]181770[/snapback][/right]


If you believe in human rights and freedoms, you should not be opposed to a person conducting their sex life as they choose, as long as all parties involved are okay with it.

And as a sidenot, to be honest I'm surprised that you are trying to come off as morally righteous or something...doesn't seem your style at all.

QUOTE(defiance @ Jul 8 2005, 02:40 AM)
...
And also, I have also heard before about what Lostphoenix is talking about, how it is very miserable for the actors, and also very unhealthy. I have heard that AIDS and other STDs are rampant among porn actors.
[right][snapback]181813[/snapback][/right]


Perhaps you could provide us with some sort of study giving an indication of this (or not) rather than saying you "heard x." Not trying to sound like an ass here, but you should formulate your opinions based on solid facts, not just something you heard.

QUOTE(defiance @ Jul 8 2005, 02:40 AM)
Let me ask you Holter: do you think prostitution is okay too? You say you can't respect my opinion very much when I'm "closeminded and harsh" about somebody's job; but would you say that about prostitution as well? Or at least for single people? It's okay for them, right? By your standards it should be, anyway.
[right][snapback]181813[/snapback][/right]


Why wouldn't it be? Is prostitution really more degrading than any other wage slave job? (I don't know the answer, I'm wondering).

: PessimisticPacifist Jul 8 2005, 06:50 AM

Sex is 100% fine, in my opinion, as long as all parties involved agree to the act. This includes Pornography, Prostitution, Orgies or "Normal" sex.

QUOTE
if somebody is happy to do it, there's no quarel with that, but a lot of people are not and that's those that are talked about.

They can always quit. You make it sound as if they're being FORCED to have sex. It's a job, they're getting paid for it. If they so badly want better conditions then they can start a Union. Hell, you seem very concerned about their well-being; why don't you start a labour union for all the porn-stars out there?

I'm sorry... but the argument "The porn-stars don't want to do this job" is b/s. They're not forced to do anything, they can always quit and work a McDonald's if nothing else. Although I don't have any facts, I find it very hard to believe that these people are participating in these films without any ounce of passion for the business and what it entails.

Prostitution should absolutely be made legal. It is two consenting parties participating in sexual acts. No, I would not partake in it, but I feel it serves no purpose being illegal. I find it a hard law to govern as well. Let's say your best friend has sex with you weekly and you pay him/her for it each time. That is considered prostitution, yet I doubt they'll be arrested for it.

As long as all parties are consenting, the act should be allowed.

: Lostphoenix Jul 8 2005, 07:17 AM

QUOTE(Holter @ Jul 8 2005, 07:50 AM)
QUOTE
that you think that people deserve your asshole behaviour is stupid, but maybe its time you directed it on male member that qualifies to your meter whom youre gonna be an asshole to since you don't seem to have many ways to vent your frustrations,to show some balls at least.
[right][snapback]181821[/snapback][/right]


oh so women arent up to par? is that what your saying? Ill remember you said that.

i just find funny to be a permanently a target for your snide remarks, its getting boring and i'd prefer to have a different kinda interaction with people, whoever they are.

You can keep on trying to tell people what to do, trying to tell me that i should act this way, or telling people that they should really look at themselves first, or do more research if they are going to argue with someone since you seem to be so perfect and all-knowledgeable - but im really fine with who i am. I actually think I am a pretty agreeable person, as do most people that know me.

now i need to go figure out a way to show my balls so that i can earn your respect, your majesty.



i never said i'm perfect, or all knowledgeable person- i don't even know why you seem to see me that way- i don't know where you get that, i'd be god if i knew it all, i'd not read anymore books or try to look things up that i'm interested in. if i have a knowledge about something, its because i do things i like totally to how far i can go, and since i'm not god, its still only to my human limits.. but i'm definitely not all mightily knowledgeable in even things i like, because there's always more to learn and always more things to look into. and i'm not knowledgeable for example when it comes to mathematics...heh.
i'm not telling you what to do, i just wish you'd stop the snide remarks on my account, whenever you come out of music forum. and the fact that being asshole is ok as long those people don't measure up to you. i stick up for my friends or people i see as underdogs etc...., and i stick up for myself, but if people leave my friends or me and others alone, i've got no reason to raise my objections.

you don't have to win my respect at all, unless you actually want me to respect you, i don't have a problem with you, maybe you should pm me and get to know me better if you're interested instead of snide remarks, i'd approciate that much more or just plain tried to communicate different if you disagree with what i have to say then what communication there was. if i'm not provoked, i'm not gonna retaliate either.

Werent we talking about the porn industry? How all of the sudden did i start to be told "im doing this wrong" or "i shouldnt say that" or "you should act this way"

because you justified being an asshole to people cos they don't measure up to your standards.

I think ill choose to talk about the topic in this thread in future posts, instead of talking with you about how I should be.
[right][snapback]181822[/snapback][/right]



insurrection


The same is true of any wage slave. People may not take drugs while doing their jobs, but many take drugs or otherwise numb themselves to reality. Television, movies, computer gaming, internet and drugs are all forms of escapism. This is not exactly unique to the industry. It is an indication of a problem that is with the economic system as a whole, not just the porn industry

that's very true, but in most industries some employment rights were won...if a director fucks with the porn actor, it's much harder for him to take the director to the tribunal or court.

i also question the sexual acts that are clear perversion if they do come out of free will... i'm not taking moral stance here, but i'm not keen on that industry because i feel a) i am subsidising directly or indirectly industry that doesn't protect or treat its workers fairly and justly. thats where i see this industry as exploitative.


i consider myself lucky to not have ever had STD of any kind, even though i've not been a saint and kept my legs crossed, now i'd hate to be part of demand of profession that people put themselves under those dangers, but that's kinda personal dislike of thought of having STD.

b) a lot of porn portrayes women in a way men want to see them in, mostly because its majority of men who watch porn...note...majority..not saying women don't watch it, however if you did research, you'd find its mostly industry that caters to needs of men as they demand -in economical terms- products heh. that's where i find this industry degrading to women, since its prevalently sexist. note how many times the women in porn are good looking, and how seldom the guys are good looking.... i am saying seldom-not always, but more often then not... now if porn caters to fantasies, then women's fantasies are not populated by ugly looking bastards unless one is in love with one indeed, but love and porn are two different things, so it should kinda cater for both if we gonna talk about equallity here.

independently this goes same for prostitution, its socially more acceptable if men go for a prostitute, then for a women to go for a male prostitute, a woman like that is looked up on as 'desperate, bored housewife' or something. you'd have men more readily admitting to visiting a prostitute then vice versa, even though i'm sure that male prostitute don't complain of lack of business.

d) i don't think majority of them 'enjoy it', thats the fact i was arguing originally. whether they'd enjoy it if they had more say in what they do is arguable untill that happens in the industry, but iam doubtful about that fact.

e) child porn and animal porn and any disgusting porn is part of this industry and you can't just divorce porn
that you may want to watch from perverted version of porn, porn you like those people are making
money also from the perverted porn, they are not divorced and by contributing to the what you consider as healthy porn, you are also investing in industry that produces this shit...unless you bring in ethical porn, that's what you are indirectly buying into.

PP,

it may seem bullshit to you, because you think they can just walk out of their job.

the fact is, they don't see it that way....

not everybody is empowered to be able to upleave what they don't like
you have women who stay with abusive partners, to you and me that doesn't make sence, but for them it does

many of them had, or got hooked to drugs, its fucking expensive habit and in many other jobs you'd be sucked for being a junkie. that's some of the reasons they don't leave.

: PessimisticPacifist Jul 8 2005, 07:30 AM

QUOTE
it may seem bullshit to you, because you think they can just walk out of their job.

the fact is, they don't see it that way....

That's the same with any job... My first job I held for 2 years, and I wanted to quit badly for months, but didn't have the balls to do it. No, I wasn't a pornstar or a prostitute: I was a cook and a dishwasher at a restaurant.

It's not fun having to quit, cause then you gotta look for another job... but if the conditions are too horrible, they can quit just like any other person with a paying job.

QUOTE
not everybody is empowered to be able to upleave what they don't like
you have women who stay with abusive partners, to you and me that doesn't make sence, but for them it does

So now we're equating pornstars with just women, and not just that... but women in abusive relationships? blink.gif

QUOTE
many of them had, or got hooked to drugs, its fucking expensive habit and in many other jobs you'd be sucked for being a junkie.

People with "normal" slave-wage jobs can be drug addicts as well. And sorry, but I don't understand what you mean by "sucked for being a junkie"? Could you explain that please?

: Lostphoenix Jul 8 2005, 07:32 AM

ps..oh yeah, i'd really see myself as a successful crusader for the right wins of this industry, you seem to have a big confidence in me PP.... i didn't know i'm so powerful to be able to create union for them! or are you telling me i'm underestimating myself.... i'd say i need support for that....

this argument is like, if you don't like war PP, why didn't you stop Bush from doing it?

no, did i say those women are like those pornstars, i am using that as an example.... examples don't have to be always related to the issue wacko.gif in linear way. i'm trying to explain you an emotional state of disempowerment. that's when you can't walk out of things however horrible they are, and however pain you suffer.



but i'm saying look, being beaten up by a partner is for sure what you don't like to have, and you have a chance to leave. but however horrible stuff those women go thru with their partner they don't leave.

if those people are cought up in the same emotional pattern, they're not gonna quit however horrible things are.

i lived with a junkie and i can tell you that many employers would not take him on. if they also walked into say restaurant job, they'll not have money to buy five hundred or something bucks to pay for their habbit a week or whatever. don't tell me, for example in your job, you'd be able to buy shitloads of coke or whatever.

: insurrection Jul 8 2005, 07:43 AM

QUOTE(PessimisticPacifist @ Jul 8 2005, 10:50 AM)
Sex is 100% fine, in my opinion, as long as all parties involved agree to the act. This includes Pornography, Prostitution, Orgies or "Normal" sex.
[right][snapback]181821[/snapback][/right]


Same as any other social interaction. Freedom of association is not a right that should be repealed.

QUOTE(PessimisticPacifist @ Jul 8 2005, 10:50 AM)
QUOTE
if somebody is happy to do it, there's no quarel with that, but a lot of people are not and that's those that are talked about.

They can always quit. You make it sound as if they're being FORCED to have sex. It's a job, they're getting paid for it. If they so badly want better conditions then they can start a Union. Hell, you seem very concerned about their well-being; why don't you start a labour union for all the porn-stars out there?
[right][snapback]181821[/snapback][/right]


A good question, but it makes me wonder how easy this would be, considering the way the actors are treated. They may be coerced into not unionizing...

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 8 2005, 11:17 AM)
insurrection


The same is true of any wage slave. People may not take drugs while doing their jobs, but many take drugs or otherwise numb themselves to reality. Television, movies, computer gaming, internet and drugs are all forms of escapism. This is not exactly unique to the industry. It is an indication of a problem that is with the economic system as a whole, not just the porn industry

that's very true, but in most industries some employment rights were won...if a director fucks with the porn actor, it's much harder for him to take the director to the tribunal or court.

i also question the sexual acts that are clear perversion if they do come out of free will... i'm not taking moral stance here, but i'm not keen on that industry because i feel a) i am subsidising directly or indirectly industry that doesn't protect or treat its workers fairly and justly.  thats where i see this industry as exploitative.


i consider myself lucky to not have ever had STD of any kind, even though i've not been a saint and kept my legs crossed, now i'd hate to be part of demand of profession that people put themselves under those dangers, but that's kinda personal dislike of thought of having STD.

b) a lot of porn portrayes women in a way men want to see them in, mostly because its majority of men who watch porn...note...majority..not saying women don't watch it, however if you did research, you'd find its mostly industry that caters to needs of men as they demand -in economical terms- products heh. that's where i find this industry degrading to women, since its prevalently sexist. note how many times the women in porn are good looking, and how seldom the guys are good looking....  i am saying seldom-not always, but more often then not... now if porn caters to fantasies, then women's fantasies are not populated by ugly looking bastards unless one is in love with one indeed, but love and porn are two different things, so it should kinda cater for both if we gonna talk about equallity here.

independently this goes same for prostitution, its socially more acceptable if men go for a prostitute, then for a women to go for a male prostitute, a woman like that is looked up on as 'desperate, bored housewife' or something. you'd have men more readily admitting to visiting a prostitute then vice versa, even though i'm sure that male prostitute don't complain of lack of business.

d) i don't think majority of them 'enjoy it', thats the fact i was arguing originally. whether they'd enjoy it if they had more say in what they do is arguable untill that happens in the industry, but iam doubtful about that fact.

e) child porn and animal porn and any disgusting porn is part of this industry and you can't just divorce porn
that you may want to watch from perverted version of porn, porn you like those people are making
money also from the perverted porn, they are not divorced and by contributing to the what you consider as healthy porn, you are also investing in industry that produces this shit...unless you bring in ethical porn, that's what you are indirectly buying into.
[right][snapback]181853[/snapback][/right]


I pretty much agree on all your points.

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 8 2005, 11:17 AM)
PP,

it may seem bullshit to you, because you think they can just walk out of their job.

the fact is, they don't see it that way....

not everybody is empowered to be able to upleave what they don't like
you have women who stay with abusive partners, to you and me that doesn't make sence, but for them it does
[right][snapback]181853[/snapback][/right]


I don't think you can logically compare a job to a relationship with a spouse. What you are talking about is battered woman syndrome, which is a lot different from anything to do with pornography...

QUOTE(PessimisticPacifist @ Jul 8 2005, 11:30 AM)
QUOTE
many of them had, or got hooked to drugs, its fucking expensive habit and in many other jobs you'd be sucked for being a junkie.

People with "normal" slave-wage jobs can be drug addicts as well. And sorry, but I don't understand what you mean by "sucked for being a junkie"? Could you explain that please?
[right][snapback]181856[/snapback][/right]


I think she meant "sacked for being a junkie."

: Lostphoenix Jul 8 2005, 07:54 AM

yeah, i meant fired, sacked...do pardon my mispelling or not hired in the first place.

at least in england

if your job finds you in possession of drugs and its in their policy as its in many policies, they have grounds to fire you.

that 'battered' woman syndrome i used as an example not saying its got to do with pornography, but dispowerment is not only linked to battered women.
or you can call it a victims position....when people are in position they don't wanna be in, but nevertheless they stay there for lack of confidence, or for being intimidated etc....etc..

: PessimisticPacifist Jul 8 2005, 08:56 AM

QUOTE
that 'battered' woman syndrome i used as an example not saying its got to do with pornography, but dispowerment is not only linked to battered women.
or you can call it a victims position....when people are in position they don't wanna be in

But that applies to many jobs... if not all jobs. Noone likes quitting their jobs, especially a if a fear exists. Like you said: it's not specific to the pornography business.

: Sara Jul 9 2005, 04:20 PM

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 8 2005, 01:14 AM)
if you take away the economical reasons, i would find that minimum of 80% of the people will not be in that industry.

if you enjoy something you don't need to paint a better mood over it by taking drugs. a lot of them feel degraded in their job.... but i guess they're just delluded, they only do it and take shit amount of drugs just to make themselves go thru with it because 'they enjoy it'. 

i think you really need to meet some of these people sara and do some research to find that your 'they enjoy' if it is reality of the people or what you'd like to have as a nice picture of that industry. i mean if its not degrading, why don't you actually go for it?
[right][snapback]181713[/snapback][/right]


how did u come up with the number 80%? what research did u rely on? do u know that 86% of the statistics are made up on the spot?

if you enjoy something you don't need to do drugs, that could be argued for music, sports, as well as porn. doesn't make music or sports degrading.

what makes you think i haven't met any of "these people"?

what makes you think i have a "nice" picture of the industry? i know it has its flaws, but it's not degrading if the participants are consenting adults.

why not go for it? do u think that being a janitor is degrading? would u leave ur job now and just become a janitor because u don't think it's degrading? blink.gif

: Sara Jul 9 2005, 04:30 PM

QUOTE(defiance @ Jul 8 2005, 08:02 AM)
That's just the thing, you see: it's an industry that turns something that should be a matter of mutual love and relationship into a public entertainment industry. People who see no problem with pornography should also have no problem if their girlfriend/boyfriend/spouse was sleepingaround with other people all the time. After all, it's just for fun, right? So tell me what's wrogn with that? Or perhaps you don't believe there is anything wrong with it. Maybe you're one of those "total free love" people, who thinks it's normal. If that's the case, then I won't even bother debating this with you, cause I know it would be pointless, and I wouldn't be able to really respect your opinion at all.
[right][snapback]181770[/snapback][/right]

u can't force ur morals on other ppl defiance. if u believe sex should onlybe an act of love between two ppl then more power to u (give urself more time thu..ur only 15 and u have alot a head of u). but u gotta realise that there r ppl out there who dont think of sex the same way. who are ok with just being ''fuck buddies". it doesnt mean if u have to be like that but u gotta understand that we all have different morals.

and oh, i don't actually care if u respect my opinion. smile.gif

QUOTE(defiance @ Jul 8 2005, 06:40 PM)
QUOTE(Holter @ Jul 7 2005, 03:41 PM)
Well then you may as well just consider anytime that actors kiss to be the same, i mean if you have no problem with actors kissing in a drama, than surely you have no problem with your significant other going around kissing anyone. [right][snapback]181780[/snapback][/right]

It's not thesame at all. Yeah, I wouldn't feel very comfortable having my girlfriend kissing some other guy, but... well, it's not the same, you know. I'm sure I don't need to elaborate about the quite substantial difference between kissing and having sex. I guess some might say my view is "arbitrary" or something, but anyone with a working brain can figure out the difference, and in my view, that difference is crucial.
[right][snapback]181813[/snapback][/right]

what is the difference? u keep talking bout the "difference" and the "crucial difference" without actually telling us what the difference is... kissing and having sex are two intimate acts. if accepting porn on the screen means accepting casual sex in real life then surely accepting kissing on the screan means accepting casual random making out in real life.

: Sara Jul 9 2005, 04:38 PM

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 8 2005, 07:15 PM)
but i'd be happier if that industry was more humane and provided some security and people didn't get treated as scum...as i said i knew a journalist who had done a lot of research into this

and do you think all porn movies are sex, they'd normally go for? some of them are pretty disgusting and don't tell me they chose it...that's bullshit, its accomodating people who happen to like to watch that stuff.

blood and urine tests do show you when you've hit the STD, they're not preventive of it. 

wow, what a great excuse to be an asshole btw.
[right][snapback]181817[/snapback][/right]


we would all be happier if the industry was more humane. the only to make things more humane is to accept it and just remove the whole underground-ness that sorrounds it.

as for the "disgusting scenes", they can say no and choose where they want to act. and how do u know that these workers find it disgusting? how do we define disgusting? of course the industry caters for the audience. same with other industries too.

what research do u keep referring to? where did he conduct it? how conclusive is it?

i agree with u bout STDs that is definately a problem, and i do think that these tests help to contain it. hopefully with tougher laws we will eliminate them or reduce them.

: Sara Jul 9 2005, 04:43 PM

QUOTE(insurrection @ Jul 8 2005, 08:31 PM)
According to a review of studies of effects on adult males in the April 1992 Canadian Journal of Criminology:
QUOTE
The focus of the report is mainly on the impact of pornography on adult males, with respect to sexual aggression towards adult females. Selected for comment are that are cited most frequently in the literature as landmark studies that address a link between pornography and its presumed harmful effects. ... Psychologically, there remains confirmation that harms arising from pornography are mainly attitudinal and appear to result in aggression very rarely, except in those men already predisposed to view women negatively.


The link between pornography and aggression is contentious, and there haven't been any solid conclusions reached. However, it is interesting to note the attitudinal effects.

[right][snapback]181825[/snapback][/right]


if one is predispositioned to holding negative attitudes, then one does nto need porn. the sopranos is sufficient for that. and so porn should not be held responsible.

also attitudes held are not predictitive of behaviour. people who say they believe in certain things are not always gonna behave accordingly.

: Sara Jul 9 2005, 05:38 PM

QUOTE
i also question the sexual acts that are clear perversion if they do come out of free will... i'm not taking moral stance here, but i'm not keen on that industry because i feel a) i am subsidising directly or indirectly industry that doesn't protect or treat its workers fairly and justly.  thats where i see this industry as exploitative.


If they are not consenting then we have a problem. In which case the producers involved should be prosecuted. No one can disagree with u there.

Porn that involves children, animals, or adults against their consent is not the porn I am speaking about here. I am strictly speaking about legal porn.

Some feel exploited but as I stated before, we need tougher laws. We need to accept it and remove the taboo and the stigma associated with porn. This is the only way, because then it will be done in the open, under strict supervision. So it until we view it as a "job" in a social and legal sense, problems of the sort u talk about will not go away.

QUOTE
b) a lot of porn portrayes women in a way men want to see them in, mostly because its majority of men who watch porn...note...majority..not saying women don't watch it, however if you did research, you'd find its mostly industry that caters to needs of men as they demand -in economical terms- products heh. that's where i find this industry degrading to women, since its prevalently sexist. note how many times the women in porn are good looking, and how seldom the guys are good looking....  i am saying seldom-not always, but more often then not... now if porn caters to fantasies, then women's fantasies are not populated by ugly looking bastards unless one is in love with one indeed, but love and porn are two different things, so it should kinda cater for both if we gonna talk about equallity here


women are always looked at. Are always "observed". That is true in music, cinema, and even sports. So yes porn is made for the most part for men. The majority of porn is made by men for men. And I agree with u, women watch it too, but is it made for men primarily? Absolutely. But this goes for music videos, films, TV programmes, and sports such as tennis and field hockey (just look at the outfits and the listen to the commentators). So if one goes by ur argument, one would call these other industries sexist too. In such case, the problem does not lie in porn, rather in society as a whole. So the change should be made in society. Only then will we see change in these industries.

I'm not sure how many porn films u've seen... but I have seen few and I have seen ugly women in them too. I've also seen ok looking men in. The thing is, definition of ugly and good looking are all too subjective. Also, while there's a focus on women being "pretty", men have to be able to "perform". So if the actor is good looking but can't perform, he is substituted with an ok looking one, or ugly one who can perform better. Actually... out of the ones I have seen.. I can't say the women were pretty...

Should porn cater for women too? Absolutely. Absolutely. I'd like to see porn made for women by women, catering for women.

QUOTE
independently this goes same for prostitution, its socially more acceptable if men go for a prostitute, then for a women to go for a male prostitute, a woman like that is looked up on as 'desperate, bored housewife' or something. you'd have men more readily admitting to visiting a prostitute then vice versa, even though i'm sure that male prostitute don't complain of lack of business.


Actually, men who go to prostitutes are seen as desperate and "sick". It's just the taboo. I find the western attitude towards sex to be equally frigid and open. Very contradictory attitudes.
QUOTE
d) i don't think majority of them 'enjoy it', thats the fact i was arguing originally. whether they'd enjoy it if they had more say in what they do is arguable untill that happens in the industry, but iam doubtful about that fact.

you have not met the majority. And the research ur friend conducted has not met the majority. It may be the case that the researched sample you refer to DOES NOT enjoy porn, which is fair enough, but one has to be careful when one makes such a generalization.

Having more say in the job is an issue present in many many jobs. For example retail., Or cleaning toilets, or being a chef. If an actor feels pressured or uncomfortable, LEAVE. Seriously, leave.

QUOTE
e) child porn and animal porn and any disgusting porn is part of this industry and you can't just divorce porn
that you may want to watch from perverted version of porn, porn you like those people are making
money also from the perverted porn, they are not divorced and by contributing to the what you consider as healthy porn, you are also investing in industry that produces this shit...unless you bring in ethical porn, that's what you are indirectly buying into.


That's illegal porn. That has to be completely wiped out. There is no excuse for children and animals being exploited. not all porn producers are involved in these sick acts. There is a distinct difference between legal porn and illegal porn. You cannot say that adults that watch legal porn are "indirectly buying into" illegal porn. They are two distinct products. It's like saying that if you listen to Blackalicious or Mos Def (both decent hip hop artists) then you are indirectly buying into shit rappers who sing about bitches and whores.

: Lostphoenix Jul 10 2005, 12:31 AM




.
i don't think majority of them 'enjoy it', thats the fact i was arguing originally. whether they'd enjoy it if they had more say in what they do is arguable untill that happens in the industry, but iam doubtful about that fact.[/quote]
you have not met the majority. And the research ur friend conducted has not met the majority. It may be the case that the researched sample you refer to DOES NOT enjoy porn, which is fair enough, but one has to be careful when one makes such a generalization.


the same goes for you claiming that they enjoy it...i mean what are you basing your opinion that they enjoy it? have You asked every single one of them?
you're generalising as much that they enjoy it, if you think generalisation is wrong,then its wrong for you to take that assumption also...if its ok for you to generalise and for others not, then that's hypocritical, which i hope your not. sometimes its good to take the advice one gives - one should be careful when one makes such a generalisation.....so tell me if you conducted a WHOLE industry research if they enjoy it and substantiate your statement accordingly before its as much generalisation as the opposite claim.


: Lostphoenix Jul 10 2005, 01:42 AM

legalisation is the way as it goes with drugs or prostitution and porn, they may not be the greatness of the society, however they exist and for things to be underground is creating problems, so they do need to come out and be legal, so those people have more legal and wholesome protection and the perverted versions can be wiped out.

no not all producers may be involved with it, but however do you know which ones? that's what i meant by ethical porn, so you know what you are buying comes from production that deals only with the porn that you wanna watch. if you buy it from people that are also doing child porn and other sick stuff, then you are giving them money to finance the other. they don't put money in different pockets.

society is in many ways sexist, porn is not only one fasset of sexist attitude of them, but that doesn't change the fact that it is.


if society is sexually healthy it cannot be controlled, that's why sex had been repressed and stigmatised since centuries. getting rid of it may not see expansion of sex industry though, people may be too busy to watch porn or go to prostitutes wink.gif

: Sara Jul 10 2005, 02:12 AM

where did i claim they enjoy it? and how is using the term "some" a generalisation? to me is it irrelevant. here are the things i have said in relation to the issue of enjoyment.

QUOTE(Sara @ Jul 5 2005, 05:54 PM)
so? drugs are everywhere. ALOT of ppl in the music industry do drugs and enjoy it dunno.gif doesn't make music degrading... unsure.gif
[right][snapback]181464[/snapback][/right]

here i referred to doing drugs. a lot of those that do drugs enjoy it, at least while they r high on it. perhaps they regret it afterwards, perhaps they do it out of addiction, but most drugs make u feel good. but this is a different issue all together. nothing to do with porn, but i was just replying to ur comment bout ppl doing drugs.
QUOTE(Sara @ Jul 7 2005, 08:33 PM)
having sex in porn movies is a performance, it's not a matter of gaining personal pleasure. porn actors are aware that it's not a matter of choosing their co actors. it's a performance.
i've read interviews with sex workers and porn actoresses before... the ones i've read like it. it's a job and they said they enjoy the money and they r not intrested in a 9-5 job. why should we look at them as victims who are being degraded?
[right][snapback]181697[/snapback][/right]


here i said that enjoyment is not an issue, and is not part of porn, so in a sense the issue of enjoying doing porn is irrelevant, whether they do or not. then i said that of the interviews i have read, they enjoy it. i stated clearly that out of the ones i have read, they enjoy it. i didn't "claim" anything, i simply restated what the sex workers have said.

i didn't imply it's a majority by using terminology such as "alot" and "many" and "at least a minimum of 80%" or other strange statistical figures.

so yes i do follow my own advice.

: Sara Jul 10 2005, 02:13 AM

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 10 2005, 09:42 PM)
legalisation is the way as it goes with drugs or prostitution and porn, they may not be the greatness of the society, however they exist and for things to be underground is creating problems, so they do need to come out and be legal, so those people have more legal and wholesome protection and the perverted versions can be wiped out.

[right][snapback]182101[/snapback][/right]

i dont know how u define greatness. but yes legalising porn will mean that the workers are protected. which is what i said earlier.


QUOTE
no not all producers may be involved with it, but however do you know which ones? that's what i meant by ethical porn, so you know what you are buying comes from production that deals only with the porn that you wanna watch. if you buy it from people that are also doing child porn and other sick stuff, then you are giving them money to finance the other. they don't put money in different pockets.


speaking for myself, the times i watched them it was rented it from video stores. i dont purchase it. the problem u talk bout will go away when porn escapes the underground scene. as for the how do u know, well video stores are not gonna get legal porn films from illegal or shady porn companies. sure no one can be 100%, but video stores don't want to risk their reputations, and so to an extent they r careful.

QUOTE
society is in many ways sexist, porn is not only one fasset of sexist attitude of them, but that doesn't change the fact that it is.


the view that porn is sexist is an opinion, not a fact.

QUOTE
if society is sexually healthy it cannot be controlled, that's why sex had been repressed and stigmatised since centuries. getting rid of it may not see expansion of sex industry though, people may be too busy to watch porn or go to prostitutes

i'm not sure i'm following u. blink.gif

: insurrection Jul 10 2005, 03:55 AM

QUOTE(Sara @ Jul 9 2005, 08:43 PM)
QUOTE(insurrection @ Jul 8 2005, 08:31 PM)
According to a review of studies of effects on adult males in the April 1992 Canadian Journal of Criminology:
QUOTE
The focus of the report is mainly on the impact of pornography on adult males, with respect to sexual aggression towards adult females. Selected for comment are that are cited most frequently in the literature as landmark studies that address a link between pornography and its presumed harmful effects. ... Psychologically, there remains confirmation that harms arising from pornography are mainly attitudinal and appear to result in aggression very rarely, except in those men already predisposed to view women negatively.


The link between pornography and aggression is contentious, and there haven't been any solid conclusions reached. However, it is interesting to note the attitudinal effects.

[right][snapback]181825[/snapback][/right]


if one is predispositioned to holding negative attitudes, then one does nto need porn. the sopranos is sufficient for that. and so porn should not be held responsible.

also attitudes held are not predictitive of behaviour. people who say they believe in certain things are not always gonna behave accordingly.
[right][snapback]182033[/snapback][/right]


Yes... except attitudes effect behaviour. They may not be directly predictive of behaviour, but it makes it more likely for a person to act in a certain way. If they did not have those attitudes at all, they would be a lot less likely to act in that certain way.

: Lostphoenix Jul 10 2005, 06:35 AM

sara,porn is sexist is an opinion...maybe just a fact you'd like to call opinion. you have admitted yourself, that its mostly catered to men, and that's not sexist? tell me where that's equal? tell me why those in power positions in porn business are guys and not women? why in legal working places they have to employ people equally? so they are not discriminative and sexist.


how strange, you argued that they do enjoy it, now its not a question. you've read about some actors enjoying it and you argued that that's the norm....now it doesn't matter if they enjoy sex but if that's the job, and if you don't enjoy what you are doing for a job, , then you don't enjoy it but apparently they do enjoy it, at least those that you read about, never mind you didn't use number, but you were arguing that they enjoy it without making clear its that group you read about, which is hardly every porn actor/ess kinda confusing wacko.gif i took the number from my friend research. and also on logic, its not a job you can do forever.



on the internet you can reach any kinda shit and while shops may not display child porn, some stuff they'd sell one would puke upon...

but that's another matter




: Lostphoenix Jul 10 2005, 06:40 AM



[quote]if society is sexually healthy it cannot be controlled, that's why sex had been repressed and stigmatised since centuries. getting rid of it may not see expansion of sex industry though, people may be too busy to watch porn or go to prostitutes[/quote]
i'm not sure i'm following u. blink.gif
[right][snapback]182104[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


answer is in the history, psychology etc....the picture will come clear, there's so much literature on it, the only thing is to start. if you want to follow what i'm saying though.

: Sara Jul 10 2005, 03:06 PM

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 11 2005, 02:35 AM)
sara,porn is sexist is an opinion...maybe just a fact you'd like to call opinion.  you have admitted yourself, that its mostly catered to men, and that's not sexist? tell me where that's equal? tell me why those in power positions in porn business are guys and not women? why in legal working places they have to employ people equally? so they are not discriminative and sexist.
[right][snapback]182115[/snapback][/right]

no it is an opinion. it's not a fact. it's not an absolute. there are feminists out there (eg. Catherine Lumby) who have written about porn doing a lot for women. so u thinking its sexist is just one way of looking at it. and oh, it caters for men, but i've seen some and some did have a thing or two for women. like women on top, or lesbian women. most of the producers are men is the case for every industry, even in the ones that employ men and women equally, women are paid less on average. at least in porn the women make more money. so u think it's sexist, and that is an opinion, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. i think some dimensions of porn may be sexist but i believe we can work on that. i do believe that if i choose to view porn in its entirety as sexist then i am reducing it and simplifying it rather than look at it as a multidimensional product.

QUOTE
how strange, you argued that they do enjoy it, now its not a question. you've read about some actors enjoying it and you argued that that's the norm....now it doesn't matter if they enjoy sex but if that's the job, and if you don't enjoy what you are doing for a job, , then you don't enjoy it but apparently they do enjoy it, at least those that you read about, never mind you didn't use number, but you were arguing that they enjoy it without making clear its that group you read about, which is hardly every porn actor/ess kinda confusing wacko.gif i took the number from my friend research. and also on logic, its not a job you can do forever.


what?! blink.gif where did i argue that enjoying it is the norm? how did i not make it clear that i was referring only to the ones i have read? this is what i said, look here
QUOTE
i've read interviews with sex workers and porn actoresses before... the ones i've read like it. it's a job and they said they enjoy the money and they r not intrested in a 9-5 job. why should we look at them as victims who are being degraded?
clearly i said "the ones i've read". i didn't imply it was the norm, and i didnt say "many" or "a lot" or "the majority".

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 11 2005, 02:40 AM)
QUOTE
if society is sexually healthy it cannot be controlled, that's why sex had been repressed and stigmatised since centuries. getting rid of it may not see expansion of sex industry though, people may be too busy to watch porn or go to prostitutes


answer is in the history, psychology etc....the picture will come clear, there's so much literature on it, the only thing is to start. if you want to follow what i'm saying though.
[right][snapback]182116[/snapback][/right]


what picutre? i don't even know what ur trying to say? r u saying that if we rid porn of the stigma, it may not consequently mean that porn as an industry will expand? so...? who said anything bout the expansion of porn...? we were merely saying that if porn is stigma-free the rights of the workers will be better protected.

: Sara Jul 11 2005, 01:03 AM

QUOTE(insurrection @ Jul 10 2005, 11:55 PM)
Yes... except attitudes effect behaviour. They may not be directly predictive of behaviour, but it makes it more likely for a person to act in a certain way. If they did not have those attitudes at all, they would be a lot less likely to act in that certain way.
[right][snapback]182108[/snapback][/right]


ah huh... but and then what?


QUOTE
i took the number from my friend research. and also on logic, its not a job you can do forever.


u got the 80% from the research ur friend conducted? is his/her research accessible to the public? or can u just tell us more bout it? smile.gif

so wait, did u use ur logic or ur friends research when u stated that figure?

there r not many jobs that ppl can do forever. actually i dont think there's anything someone can do forever. there's a timeline for everything. ppl dont do sports forever, for instance.

: Lostphoenix Jul 11 2005, 07:41 AM

my friend is a freelance, his stuff was published in independent publications, the one he published about this, is some years back and i do no longer own it (when you move you throw a hell lot of stuff), not sure if it was accessible on line, but i shall contact him and try to get it here, but don't know when that is,

if anybody enjoys watching porn, its their individual choice and its entirely up to them, i got no problem with it, after all, i have seen some in my time and day, but frankly prefer making love to watching it....if the industry has its dark side, what's the point in trying pretend its not there? for example maybe not all your products at home are eco friendly and from company that is unethical, you can do it with a knowledge of that and nobody, least yourself have to judge you, but i guess if you are scared of that judment, you need to justify, that the product and the industry producing it, indeed is all innocent...

well, read thru these

SERIOUSLY LONG POST


Pornos portray rape, not pleasure


Pornography is a part of our lives whether we like it or not. The social acceptance of porn, specifically the hardcore variety, is a growing trend in our society. As the stigma around this type of entertainment disappears, I have to ask myself, what effect is this having on my world?

Many college students enjoy viewing porn, whether it's gay, straight, on video, the Internet or in magazines. I know a lot of people who like porn. The male viewers use it to help relieve stress, females use it to help get off and couples watch it together for a little romantic aid.

Personally, I don't feel like I need it; when it comes to sex, I'd rather do it than watch other people doing it for money.

The people I've talked to who enjoy porn don't see a problem with this form of entertainment. They say what they watch is harmless and those who work in the industry choose to do so. Besides, they get paid a lot of money! After all, U.S. porn revenues were larger than those of ABC, CBS and NBC in 2003 alone.

It's not always that simple, though.

One of the most well-known porn videos is Deep Throat, a classic 1970s flick. It depicts a girl who just loves to give head, but is tame compared with the hardcore stuff available today. However, according to the film's star Linda Lovelace, the film is basically a documentary of her rape from start to finish. She claims in her books Ordeal and Out of Bondage that she was forced by filmmakers to perform many sexual acts against her will.

In the late 1980s the New York General Commission on Pornography put together an abundance of testimony on both sides of the issue. Though much of the testimony I read made me sick, one man's account stuck out. He stated "I, myself, have been on a couple sets where the young ladies have been forced to do even anal sex scenes with a guy which (sic) is rather large and I have seen them crying out in pain."

I have heard more than 70 percent of all porn stars have a history of sexual abuse, but finding information on these statistics is very hard. Not many people are willing to talk about the horrible and dark side of the porn industry. Although it's hard to deny those employed in the industry are engaged in some very unhealthy sexual behavior, many people may not realize crimes such as rape are sometimes committed during the filming of porn.

Aside from the problems within the industry, what effects does porn have on the world at large? Not any good effects, according to Diana Russel, Ph.D., who has conducted extensive research on pornography. One of her studies stated, "... the 25 to 30 percent of male students who admit that there is some likelihood they would rape a woman if they could be assured of getting away with it increased to 57 percent after exposure to sexually violent images."

I have little first-hand knowledge about the content of hardcore porn; however, this doesn't mean I don't know what's out there. I hear guys talk and I am constantly disgusted with the things I hear. "Girls Gone Wild" is bad enough with its idea of drunk chicks being taken advantage of, but it might as well be "Sesame Street" compared with some of the videos I know are available.

I once overheard a former co-worker telling another guy about his favorite kind of porn, which involves gagging. It involves girls who are forced to perform oral sex until they choke and tears come out of their eyes. If this isn't a depiction of rape, I don't know what is.

I'm sure there are many porn stars who just enjoy having sex, videos that don't involve depictions of rape and porn connoisseurs who never intend to commit rape. However, I still believe porn is a very negative aspect on how sexuality is viewed in our society and particularly influences how men perceive women.

After watching hours of porn depicting vapid women basically being raped and liking it, it's not hard to see why so many men see us as nothing more than objects. Don't get me wrong, I'm no prude. I just think sex should be consensual and kept in private between those involved - how ever many that may be. I'd rather not condone an unethical industry that promotes rape just to get guys' rocks off.



-Gaia Veenis is a journalism junior and a senior staff writer.


by Robert Jensen

Before we get to the debates about how to define pornography, or whether pornography and sexual violence are connected, or how the First Amendment should apply to pornography, let’s stop to ponder something more basic:

What does the existence of a multi-billion-dollar pornography industry say about us, about men?

More specifically, what does “Blow Bang #4” say?


This is what pornography looks like

“Blow Bang #4” was in the “mainstream” section of a local adult video store. For a research project on the content of contemporary mass-marketed pornography, I asked the folks who work there to help me pick out typical videos rented by the typical customer. One of the 15 tapes I left with was “Blow Bang #4.”

“Blow Bang #4” is: Eight different scenes in which a woman kneels in the middle of a group of three to eight men and performs oral sex on them. At the end of each scene, each of the men ejaculates onto the woman’s face or into her mouth. To borrow from the description on the video box, the video consists of: “Dirty little bitches surrounded by hard throbbing cocks … and they like it.”

In one of these scenes, a young woman dressed as a cheerleader is surrounded by six men. For about seven minutes, “Dynamite” (the name she gives on tape) methodically moves from man to man while they offer insults that start with “you little cheerleading slut” and get uglier from there. For another minute and a half, she sits upside down on a couch, her head hanging over the edge, while men thrust into her mouth, causing her to gag. She strikes the pose of the bad girl to the end. “You like coming on my pretty little face, don’t you,” she says, as they ejaculate on her face and in her mouth for the final two minutes of the scene.

Five men have finished. The sixth steps up. As she waits for him to ejaculate onto her face, now covered with semen, she closes her eyes tightly and grimaces. For a moment, her face changes; it is difficult to read her emotions, but it appears she may cry. After the last man, number six, ejaculates, she regains her composure and smiles. Then the narrator off camera hands her the pom-pom she had been holding at the beginning of the tape and says, “Here’s your little cum mop, sweetheart -- mop up.” She buries her face in the pom-pom. The screen fades, and she is gone.

You can rent “Blow Bang #4” for $3 at the store I visited, or buy it online for $19.95. Or if you like, you can track down one of the other six tapes in the “Blow Bang” series. “If you love seeing one girl sucking on a bunch of cocks at one time, then this is the series for you,” a reviewer says. “The camera work is great.”

Even a cursory review of pornography reveals that great camera work is not a requirement for success. “Blow Bang #4” is one of 11,000 new hardcore pornographic videos released each year, one of 721 million tapes rented each year in a country where total pornographic video sales and rentals total about $4 billion annually.

Pornography’s profits rely not on quality of camera work but on the ability to produce erections in men quickly. There are many pornographic videos less harsh than “Blow Bang #4,” and some that push much further into “extreme” territory with overt violence and sadomasochism. The company that produces the “Blow Bang” series, Armageddon Productions, boasts on one of its websites that “Vivid Sucks/Armageddon Fucks,” taking a shot at the reputation of Vivid, one of the industry leaders that is known for tamer videos with slicker production values, or in Vivid’s own words, “quality erotic film entertainment for the couples market.”

This is what quality erotic film entertainment for the couples market looks like

“Delusional,” a Vivid release in 2000, is another of the 15 tapes I viewed. In its final sex scene, the lead male character (Randy) professes his love for the female lead (Lindsay). After discovering that her husband had been cheating on her, Lindsay had been slow to get into another relationship, waiting for the right man -- a sensitive man -- to come along. It looked as if Randy was the man. “I’ll always be here for you no matter what,” Randy tells her. “I just want to look out for you.” Lindsay lets down her defenses, and they embrace.

After about three minutes of kissing and removing their clothes, Lindsay begins oral sex on Randy while on her knees on the couch, and he then performs oral sex on her while she lies on the couch. They then have intercourse, with Lindsay saying, “Fuck me, fuck me, please” and “I have two fingers in my ass -- do you like that?” This leads to the usual progression of positions: She is on top of him while he sits on the couch, and then he enters her vaginally from behind before he asks, “Do you want me to fuck you in the ass?” She answers in the affirmative; “Stick it in my ass,” she says. After two minutes of anal intercourse, the scene ends with him masturbating and ejaculating on her breasts.

Which is the most accurate description of what contemporary men in the United States want sexually, Armageddon or Vivid? The question assumes a significant difference between the two; the answer is that both express the same sexual norm. “Blow Bang #4” begins and ends with the assumption that women live for male pleasure and want men to ejaculate on them. “Delusional” begins with the idea that women want something more caring in a man, but ends with her begging for anal penetration and ejaculation. One is cruder, the other slicker. Both represent a single pornographic mindset, in which male pleasure defines sex and female pleasure is a derivate of male pleasure. In pornography, women just happen to love exactly what men love to do to them, and what men love to do in pornography is to control and use, which allows the men who watch pornography to control and use as well.

When I do public talks on pornography and the feminist critique of the commercial sex industry, I describe -- but do not show -- these kinds of videos. I explain the other conventions of the industry, such as “double penetration,” the common practice in which a woman is penetrated by two men’s penises, vaginally and anally, at the same time, and in some of those scenes the woman also performs oral sex on a third man at the same time. I explain that virtually every sex scene ends with a man or men ejaculating onto a woman, most often in the face, what the industry calls a “facial.”

Many of the people in the audience, particularly the women, tell me that they find it difficult to hear about these things, even when the acts are described with the kind of clinical detachment I try to maintain. One woman approached me after a lecture and said, “What you said was important, but I wish I hadn’t been here. I wish I didn’t know what you told us. I wish I could forget it.”

For many of the women who feel so defeated by knowing, the most distressing part doesn’t seem to be simply learning what is in the videos but knowing that men gain pleasure from what is in the videos. They ask me, over and over, “Why do men like this? What do you guys get from this?” They want to know why the mostly male consumers spend an estimated $10 billion a year on pornography in the United States and $56 billion around the world.

It is an important question with, no doubt, complex answers. What does is say about our society when men will take home a tape like “Blow Bang #4” and watch it, and masturbate to it? What does it say about our society’s conception of sexuality and masculinity that large numbers of men can find pleasure in watching a young woman gag while a penis is pushed into her throat followed by six men ejaculating on her face and in her mouth? Or that other men, who might find that scene too extreme, prefer to watch one man have sex with a woman that begins with tender words and ends with “Do you want me to fuck you in the ass?” and ejaculation on her breasts? What does it say that such a video, made for men to masturbate to, is considered classy and upscale?

I think it says masculinity in this culture is in trouble.


A footnote: Why has the feminist critique of pornography been attacked so strenuously?

There are many points in the pornography debate on which reasonable people can disagree. Legal strategies raise important issues about freedom and responsibility, and definitive connections between media consumption and human behavior are always difficult to establish. More generally, sexuality is a complex phenomenon in which wide human variation makes universal claims suspect.

But the feminist critique inspires an apoplectic reaction from pornography’s defenders that, to me, has always seemed over the top. The political debate that the critique set off, both within feminism and in the wider culture, seems unusually intense. From my experience of writing and speaking publicly, I can be fairly certain that what little I have written here so far will cause some readers to condemn me as a sexual fascist or a prude.

One obvious reason for the strength of these denunciations is that pornographers make money, hence there is a profit motive in moving quickly with maximal force to marginalize or eliminate criticism of the industry. But the more important reason, I believe, is that at some level everyone knows that the feminist critique of pornography is about more than pornography. It encompasses a critique of the way “normal” men in this culture have learned to experience sexual pleasure -- and the ways in which women and children learn to accommodate that and/or suffer its consequences. That critique is not just a threat to the pornography industry or to the personal collections that men have stashed in their closets, but to everyone. The feminist critique asks a simple but devastating question of men: “Why is this sexually pleasurable to you, and what kind of person does that make you?” And because heterosexual women live with men and men’s sexual desire, those women can’t escape the question -- either in terms of the desire of their boyfriends, partners, and husbands, or the way they have come to experience sexuality. That takes us way beyond magazines, movies, and computer screens, to the heart of who we are and how we live sexually and emotionally. That scares people. It probably should scare us. It has always scared me.

Robert Jensen, an associate professor of journalism at the University of Texas at Austin, is the author of Writing Dissent: Taking Radical Ideas from the Margins to the Mainstream and co-author of Pornography: The Production and Consumption of Inequality .


this article is kinda about what ins was about
I. THE ROLE OF PORNOGRAPHY IN PREDISPOSING SOME MALES TO WANT TO RAPE

"I went to a porno bookstore, put a quarter in a slot, and saw this porn movie. It was just a guy coming up from behind a girl and attacking her and raping her. That's when I started having rape fantasies. When I saw that movie, it was like somebody lit a fuse from my childhood on up... I just went for it, went out and raped." Rapist interviewed by Beneke, 1982, pp. 73-74.

According to Factor I in my theoretical model, pornography can induce a desire to rape women in males who previously had no such desire, and it can increase or intensify the desire to rape in males who already have felt this desire. This section will provide the evidence for the four different ways in which pornography can induce this predisposition that are listed alongside Factor I in Figure 1.

(1) Pairing sexually arousing/gratifying stimuli with rape

The laws of social learning (for example, classical conditioning, instrumental conditioning, and social modeling), about which there is now considerable consensus among psychologists, apply to all the mass media, including pornography. As Donnerstein testified at the Hearings in Minneapolis: "If you assume that your child can learn from Sesame Street how to count one, two, three, four, five, believe me, they can learn how to pick up a gun". Presumably, males can learn equally well how to rape, beat, sexually abuse, and degrade females.

A simple application of the laws of social learning suggests that viewers of pornography can develop arousal responses to depictions of rape, murder, child sexual abuse, or other assaultive behavior. Researcher S. Rachman of the Institute of Psychiatry, Maudsley Hospital, London, has demonstrated that male subjects can learn to become sexually aroused by seeing a picture of a woman's boot after repeatedly seeing women's boots in association with sexually arousing slides of nude females (Rachman and Hodgson, 1968). The laws of learning that operated in the acquisition of the boot fetish can also teach males who were not previously aroused by depictions of rape to become so. All it may take is the repeated association of rape with arousing portrayals of female nudity (or clothed females in provocative poses).

Even for males who are not sexually excited during movie portrayals of rape, masturbation subsequent to the movie reinforces the association. This constitutes what R.J. McGuire, J.M. Carlisle and B.G. Young refer to as "masturbatory conditioning" (Cline, 1974, p. 210). The pleasurable experience of orgasm--an expected and planned--for activity in many pornography parlors--is an exceptionally potent reinforcer. The fact that pornography is widely used by males as ejaculation material is a major factor that differentiates it from other mass media, intensifying the lessons that male consumers learn from it.

(2) Increasing males' self-generated rape fantasies

Further evidence that exposure to pornography can create in males a predisposition to rape where none existed before is provided by an experiment conducted by Malamuth. Malamuth classified 29 male students as sexually force-oriented or non-force-oriented on the basis of their responses to a questionnaire (1981a). These students were then randomly assigned to view either a rape version or a mutally consenting version of a slide-audio presentation. The account of rape and accompanying pictures were based on a story in a popular pornographic magazine, which Malamuth describes as follows:

The man in this story finds an attractive woman on a deserted road. When he approaches her, she faints with fear. In the rape version, the man ties her up and forcibly undresses her. The accompanying narrative is as follows: "You take her into the car. Though this experience is new to you, there is a temptation too powerful to resist. When she awakens, you tell her she had better do exactly as you say or she'll be sorry. With terrified eyes she agrees. She is undressed and she is willing to succumb to whatever you want. You kiss her and she returns the kiss." Portrayal of the man and woman in sexual acts follows; intercourse is implied rather than explicit (1981a, p. 38).

In the mutually consenting version of the story the victim was not tied up or threatened. Instead, on her awakening in the car, the man told her that "she is safe and that no one will do her any harm. She seems to like you and you begin to kiss." The rest of the story is identical to the rape version (Malamuth, 1981a, p. 38).

All subjects were then exposed to the same audio description of a rape read by a female. This rape involved threats with a knife, beatings, and physical restraint. The victim was portrayed as pleading, crying, screaming, and fighting against the rapist (Abel, Barlow, Blanchard, and Guild, 1977, p. 898). Malamuth reports that measures of penile tumescence as well as self-reported arousal "indicated that relatively high levels of sexual arousal were generated by all the experimental stimuli" (1981a, p. 33).

After the 29 male students had been exposed to the rape audio tape, they were asked to try to reach as high a level of sexual arousal as possible by fantasizing about whatever they wanted but without any direct stimulation of the penis (1981a, p. 40). Self-reported sexual arousal during the fantasy period indicated that those students who had been exposed to the rape version of the first slide-audio presentation, created more violent sexual fantasies than those exposed to the mutually consenting version irrespective of whether they had been classified as force-oriented or non-force-oriented (1981a, p. 33).

As the rape version of the slide-audio presentation is typical of what is seen in pornography, the results of this experiment suggests that similar pornographic depictions are likely to generate rape fantasies even in previously non-force-oriented consumers. As Edna Einsiedel points out (1986, p. 60):

Current evidence suggests a high correlation between deviant fantasies and deviant behaviors....Some treatment methods are also predicated on the link between fantasies and behavior by attempting to alter fantasy patterns in order to change the deviant behaviors (1986, p. 60).

Because so many people resist the idea that a desire to rape may develop as a result of viewing pornography, let us focus for a moment on behavior other than rape. There is abundant testimonial evidence that at least some males decide they would like to perform certain sex acts on women after seeing pornography portraying such sex acts. For example, one of the men who answered Shere Hite's question on pornography wrote: "It's great for me. It gives me new ideas to try and see, and it's always sexually exciting" (1981, p. 780; emphasis added). Of course, there's nothing wrong with getting new ideas from pornography or anywhere else, nor with trying them out, as long as they are not actions that subordinate or violate others. Unfortunately, many of the behaviors modeled in pornography do subordinate and violate women, sometimes viciously.

The following statements were made by women testifying at the Hearings on Pornography in Minneapolis, Minnesota, in 1993 (Russell, 1993a). Ms. M testified that,

I agree to act out in private a lot of the scenarios that my husband read to me. These depicted bondage and different sexual acts that I found humiliating to do... He read the pornography like a textbook, like a journal. When he finally convinced me to be bound, he read in the magazine how to tie the knots and bind me in a way that I couldn't escape. Most of the scenes where I had to dress up or go through different fantasies were the exact same scenes that he has read in the magazines.

Ms. O described a case in which a man

brought pornographic magazines, books, and paraphernalia into the bedroom with him and told her that if she did not perform the sexual acts in the "dirty" books and magazines, he would beat her and kill her.

Ms. S testified about the experience of a group of women prostitutes who, she said,

were forced constantly to enact specific scenes that men had witnessed in pornography... These men... would set up scenarios, usually with more than one woman, to copy scenes that they had seen portrayed in magazines and books. [For example, Ms. S quoted a woman in her group as saying:] "He held up a porn magazine with a picture of a beaten woman and said, 'I want you to look like that. I want you to hurt.' He then began beating me. When I did not cry fast enough, he lit a cigarette and held it right above my breast for a long time before he burned me."

Ms. S. also described what three men did to a nude woman prostitute whom they had tied up while she was seated on a chair:

They burned her with cigarettes and attached nipple clips to her breasts. They had many S and M magazines with them and showed her many pictures of women appearing to consent, enjoy, and encourage this abuse. She was held for twelve hours while she was continuously raped and beaten.

Another example cited by Ms. S:

They [several Johns] forced the women to act simultaneously with the movie. In the movie at this point, a group of men were urinating on a naked woman. All the men in the room were able to perform this task, so they all started urinating on the woman who was now naked.

When a male engages in a particularly unusual act that he had previously encountered in pornography, it becomes even more likely that the decision to do so was inspired by the pornography. One woman, for example, testified to the Attorney General's Commission on Pornography about the pornography-related death of her son:

My son, Troy Daniel Dunaway, was murdered on August 6, 1981, by the greed and avarice of the publishers of Hustler magazine. My son read the article "Orgasm of Death," set up the sexual experiment depicted therein, followed the explicit instructions of the article, and ended up dead. He would still be alive today were he not enticed and incited into this action by Hustler magazine's "How to Do" August 1981 article, and article which was found at his feet and which directly caused his death (1986, p. 797).

When children do what they see in pornography, it is even more improbable than in the case of adults to attribute their behavior entirely to their predispositions.

Psychologist Jennings Bryant testified to the Pornography Commission about a survey he had conducted involving 600 telephone interviews with males and females who were evenly divided into three age groups: students in junior high school, students in high school, and adults aged 19 to 39 years (1985, p. 133). Respondents were asked if "exposure to X-rated materials had made them want to try anything they saw" (1985, p. 140). Two-thirds of the males reported "wanting to try some of the behavior depicted" (1985, p. 140). Bryant reports that the desire to imitate what is seen in pornography "progressively increases as age of respondents decreases" (1985, p. 140; emphasis added). Among the junior high school students, 72% of the males reported that "they wanted to try some sexual experiment or sexual behavior that they had seen in thier initial exposure to X-rated material" (1985, p. 140).

In trying to ascertain if imitation had occurred, the respondents were asked: "Did you actually experiment with or try any of the behaviors depicted [within a few days of seeing the materials]?" (1985, p. 140). A quarter of the males answered that they had. A number of adult men answered, "no," but said that some years later they had experimented with the behaviors portrayed. However, only imitations within a few days of seeing the materials were counted (1985, p. 140). Male high school students were the most likely (31%) to report experimenting with the behaviors portrayed (1985, p. 141).

Unfortunately, no information is available on the behaviors imitated by these males. Imitating pornography is cause for concern only when the behavior imitated is violent or abusive, or when the behavior is not wanted by one or more of the participants. Despite the unavailability of this information, Bryant's study is valuable in showing how common it is for males to want to imitate what they see in pornography, and for revealing that many do imitate it within a few days of viewing it. Furthermore, given the degrading and often violent content of pornography, as well as the youthfulness and presumable susceptibility of many of the viewers, how likely is it that these males only imitated or wished to imitate the non-sexist, non-degrading, and non-violent sexual behavior?

Almost all the research on pornography to date has been conducted on men and women who were at least 18 years old. But as Malamuth points out, there is "a research basis for expecting that children would be more susceptible to the influences of mass media, including violent pornography if they are exposed to it" than adults (1985, p. 107). Bryant's telephone interviews show that very large numbers of children now have access to both hard-core and soft-core materials. For example:

The average age at which male respondents saw their first issue of Playboy or a similar magazine was 11 years (1985, p. 135).

All of the high school age males surveyed reported having read or looked at Playboy, Playgirl, or some other soft-core magazine (1985, p. 134).

High school males reported having seen an average of 16.1 issues, and junior high school males said they had seen an average of 2.5 issues.

In spite of being legally under age, junior high students reported having seen an average of 16.3 "unedited sexy R-rated films" (1985, p. 135). (Although R-rated movies are not usually considered pornographic, many of them meet my definition of pornography.)

The average age of first exposure to sexually oriented R-rated films for all respondents was 12.5 years (1985, p. 135).

Nearly 70% of the junior high students surveyed reported that they had seen their first R-rated film before they were 13 (1985, p. 135).

The vast majority of all the respondents reported exposure to hard-core, X-rated, sexually explicit material (1985, p. 135). Furthermore, "a larger proportion of high school students had seen X-rated films than any other age group, including adults": 84%, with the average age of first exposure being 16 years, 11 months (1985, p. 136).

In a more recent anonymous survey of 247 Canadian junior high school students whose average age was 14 years, James Check and Kristin Maxwell (1992) report that 87% of the boys and 61% of the girls said they had viewed video-pornography. The average age at first exposure was just under 12 years.

33% of the boys versus only 2% of the girls reported watching pornography once a month or more often. As well, 29% of the boys versus 1% of the girls reported that pornography was the source that had provided them with the most useful information about sex (i.e., more than parents, school, friends, etc.). Finally, boys who were frequent consumers of pornography and/or reported learning a lot from pornography were also more likely to say that is was "OK" to hold a girl down and force her to have intercourse (abstract).

Clearly , more research is needed on the effects of pornography on young male viewers, particularly in view of the fact that recent studies suggest that "over 50% of various categories of paraphiliacs [sex offenders] had developed their deviant arousal patterns prior to age 18" (Einsiedel, 1986, p. 53). Einsiedel goes on to say that "it is clear that the age-of-first-exposure variable and the nature of that exposure needs to be examined more carefully. There is also evidence that the longer the duration of the paraphilia, the more significant the association with use of pornography" (Abel, Mittleman, and Becker, 1985).

The first two items listed under Factor I in my theoretical model both relate to the viewing of violent pornography. But sexualizing dominance and submission is a way in which non-violent pornography can also predispose some males to want to rape women.

(3) Sexualizing dominance and submission

Canadian psychologists James Check and Ted Guloien (1989) conducted an experiment in which they distinguished between degrading non-violent pornography and erotica, and compared their effects. Their experiment is rare not only for making this distinction, but also for including non-students as subjects; 436 Toronto residents and college students were exposed to one of three types of sexual material over three viewing sessions, or to no material. The sexual materials were constructed from existing commercially available videos and validated by measuring subject's perceptions of them. The contents of the sexual materials shown to the three groups of subjects were as follows:

The sexual violence material portrayed scenes of sexual intercourse involving a woman strapped to a table and being penetrated by a large plastic penis.

The sexually explicit dehumanizing but non-violent material portrayed scenes of sexual activity that included a man sitting on top of a woman and masturbating into her face.

The sexually explicit non-degrading material portrayed sexual activities leading up to heterosexual intercourse (Check and Guloien, 1989).

Check and Guloien's experiment revealed that the viewing of both the non-violent dehumanizing materials as well as the violent materials resulted in male subjects reporting a significantly greater likelihood of engaging in rape or other coercive sex acts than the control group.

Although self-reported likelihood of raping is not a proper measure of desire to rape, as it also indicates that the internal inhibitions against acting out rape desires have been undermined to some extent, Check and Guloien's experiment does offer tentative support for my theoretical model's claim that pornography sexualizes dominance and submission. In addition, it makes theoretical sense that sexualizing dominance and submission would probably be generalized to include eroticizing rape and/or other sexually abusive behavior for some males. For example, Ms. S. testified at the Minnesota Hearings that: "Men constantly witness the abuse of women in pornography and if they can't engage in that behavior with their wives, girlfriends, or children, they force a whore to do it" (Russell, 1993a). And the Rev. Susan Wilhem testified in support of an anti-pornography ordinance in New York City that, "I came across a picture of a position my ex-husband had insisted we try. When we did, I hemorrhaged for three days. My bruised cervix is still a problem after ten years.... We should have some place to go to complain about how pornography is part of making our husbands into rapists" (Russell, 1993a).

Further research is needed on this issue, and more researchers need to follow the lead of the Canadian researchers in going beyond the distinction between violent and non-violent pornography, and distinguishing also between non-violent degrading pornography and erotica.

(4) Creating an appetite for increasingly stronger material

Dolf Zillmann and Jennings Bryant have studied the effects of what they refer to as "massive exposure" to pornography (1984). (In fact, it was not particularly massive: 4 hours and 48 minutes per week over a period of six weeks.) These researchers, unlike Malamuth and Donnerstein, focus on trying to ascertain the effects of non-violent pornography and, in the study to be described, they use a sample drawn from a non-student adult population.

Male subjects in the massive exposure condition saw 36 non-violent pornographic films, six per session per week; male subjects in the intermediate condition saw 18 such movies, three per session per week. Male subjects in the control group saw 36 non-pornographic movies. Various measures were taken after one week, two weeks, and three weeks or exposure, including the kind of materials that the subjects were most interested in viewing.

Zillmann and Bryant found that a desire for stronger material was fostered in their subjects. "Consumers graduate from common to less common forms of pornography," Zillman maintains, that is, to more violent and more degrading materials (1984, p. 127). Zillmann suggests this may be "because familiar material becomes unexciting as a result of habituation" (1984, p.127).

According to Zillmann and Bryant's research, then, pornography can transform a male who was not previously interested in the more abusive types of pornography, into one who is turned on by such material. This is consistent with Malamuth's findings (described on p. 53) that males who did not previously find rape sexually arousing, generate such fantasies after being exposed to a typical example of violent pornography.

: defiance Jul 11 2005, 09:19 PM

QUOTE(insurrection @ Jul 8 2005, 03:31 AM)
If you believe in human rights and freedoms, you should not be opposed to a person conducting their sex life as they choose, as long as all parties involved are okay with it.

And as a sidenot, to be honest I'm surprised that you are trying to come off as morally righteous or something...doesn't seem your style at all.


There are a few things I believe that surprise lefties quite a bit about my beliefs. When it comes to issues relating to sex I can sometimes actually be somewhat conservative. I think that our society was so sexually repressed for so logn that when the "sexual revolution" came, what happened was it went too far to the other extreme. Sex has a natural and practical purpose which relates to human relationships, just as human relationships themselves have that purpose. I think it has been deformed though and went from on the one hand being shunend as some necessary but regretable evil sin or something, to now being shoved in everyones faces all over the place. TV is covered in it now-a-days, particularly it tends to place women as objects, but that is not the sole factor, nor is it always the case. But either way though it's become so overwhelmingly present in every facet of culture that I can't help but think that it has been taken way too far.

On the freedoms and rights thing; yes I believe in freedoms and rights, but (this is gonna sound conservative again, but pelase pay close attention to all of my words and not just skin over it) that doesn't mean that there is no such thing as personal morality. I may sound "morally righteous" to you, but then, saying you believe in human self-determination or human rights is the same thing. It's all based on our ethics and moral, on whta we believe is right. Some morals are on a social scale (such as sharing the wealth, etc.), some are more personal (showign people some basic courtesy, etc.), and still others relate more to respectign nature (the environment in particular). My views toward sex are based on some of all three. As I said, I believe society has become too "sexed up" so to speak, and I think as a result it has just added to other things (like drugs, plus other branches of the entertainment industry) that distract people way from what's real and improtant and make them obsessed with their self-indulgent, self-centered activities. From a personal stand-point I think it is very degrading, but I wouldn't base a law just on my personal feelings. From a natural stand-point, I believe many of our culture's sexual obsessions and tendencies have gotten to a poitn where they distort it's place in nature.

So anyway, to get back to the main point; I believe in human freedom but I still believe people should take it on themselves to have soem moral decency. I wouldn't try to enforce all of my personal beliefs as law, and if my beliefs toward pornography were just based on my personal view of morality, I wouldn't bother advocating such a thign with it. But I feel that pornography, as the center and focus of society's increasingly unhealthy obsession with sex (and not just ordinary sex either -- those articles Lostphoenix posted described pretty graphically how mainstream pornography has become, and hwta it's relation has become to peoples' personal sex-lives), has become a social tumor, so to speak, much like methamphetamine or other extremely harmful and prevalent drugs. Are laws and restrictions going to stop it all? No, education's the best way. Should sexuality be completely cotnrolled by the law? No, just as I don't believe that we need laws restricting every drug that somebody considers harmful. But when it is clearly a massive detriment to our culture and our character, and education doesn't work because the people with money who bring it about keep selling it and ignorant, obsessive consumers keep buying it, then clearly something more drastic needs to be done.

QUOTE
Perhaps you could provide us with some sort of study giving an indication of this (or not) rather than saying you "heard x." Not trying to sound like an ass here, but you should formulate your opinions based on solid facts, not just something you heard.


Well my mom researched that more, I just remember her talking about it in conversations. But I will go and see if I can find statistics or a concise report on it.

QUOTE
Why wouldn't it be? Is prostitution really more degrading than any other wage slave job? (I don't know the answer, I'm wondering).
[right][snapback]181825[/snapback][/right]

Well I am strongly against capitalist wage-slavery, so I don't see how that statement could at all refute what I said, but... in a certain way, yes, for the reasons I explained in my above statements. It's degrading our culture, it's degrading the peoples' minds. And again, pornography turns people into mere sex-objects, toys for people to play with and obsess over. And if you really have no problem with sex being made that way, then as I said to Holter, you should also have no problem with say your girlfriend sleepign aroudn with a bunch of other guys, cause she's just havign fun and enjoying sex, right? And that's all it's baaut, right? Right....

Sara:

QUOTE(Sara @ Jul 9 2005, 07:30 PM)
u can't force ur morals on other ppl defiance. if u believe sex should onlybe an act of love between two ppl then more power to u (give urself more time thu..ur only 15 and u have alot a head of u). but u gotta realise that there r ppl out there who dont think of sex the same way. who are ok with just being ''fuck buddies". it doesnt mean if u have to be like that but u gotta understand that we all have different morals.


Actually I'm 17 now. I was 15 when I first joined, but that was almost two years ago. Anyway...

So then if you are against ever enforcing your morals, would you say that there should be laws against adults having sex with ten-year-old children? I have heard stories (some of them posted on this board by the way) of ten-year-old kids having sex with other kids abotu the same age. There' all kinds of crazy stuff like that. So say you have some 10 or 11-year-old kid who wants to have sex, and he/she consents to it with say a 30-year-old. Is that okay? As long as "both parties agree" right? Wouldn't that be pushing your morals on other people to not allow them to do that?

QUOTE
what is the difference? u keep talking bout the "difference" and the "crucial difference" without actually telling us what the difference is... kissing and having sex are two intimate acts. if accepting porn on the screen means accepting casual sex in real life then surely accepting kissing on the screan means accepting casual random making out in real life.
[right][snapback]182028[/snapback][/right]

So you'r telling me you would not be fazed seeing people having sex in open public areas, say at the park or something? Cause I don't see any problem with two people kissing or making out or whatever in public like that, but that would freak me out to see the other. There is a clear difference, however much you may ridiculously try to deny there is, cause they're both just "acts of affection," and any honest person shoudl realize that. Unless you have no problem with the scenario I just described?

: defiance Jul 11 2005, 10:10 PM

Okay, here's a little bit better explained thoughts of mine, particularly towards prostitution but also pornography as well. In reality, pornography is a lot like prostitution, it's just the "customers" are watching insteading directly doing the act. And this is really, by far, the most important reason for my opposition to porn and prostitution.

Pessimistic Pacifist, you said as long as all parties agree to the procedure then it's fine. By that standard, you should be a libertarian capitalist. That's what they say abotu wage-slavery, that it's not slavery at all but "free relations between workers and managers." The workers sign their contract, recieve an agreed-upon wage, and have the right to sign out at any time, granted that in the event of a law-suit the government does not choose to side with the managers. The managers make their huge profits without having to do much work, justifying thier position by pulling up their precious "contracts," and when the government interferes they scream "communism!" Yet, according to communist-anarchist philosophy (which, corret me if I'm wrong, but I believe you are a follower of), as well as most other socialist philosophies, it is not really free relations but wage-slavery, in which the owners take advanatage of the workers' poverty and economic dependence, and exploit their monopolization of the market, to bring about whatever outcoem they prefer. Basically, the workers sell themselves to the bosses so they can get a wage.

Prostitution and pornography are even worse forms of wage-slavery in that they are literally selling their bodies to make a living. Now if that is not degrading, exploitive, and immoral, then I don't know what is, and I have a hard time seeing how you can clame to oppose the capitalist wage-slave system.

: Lostphoenix Jul 12 2005, 11:32 AM

sara, the women in porn are not degraded is strange in view how many women do degrading acts in porn movies - even if you don't watch those, they are part of that industry, and to say otherwise is blind leading,and somehow bought into the box set of telling you that they 'like it', and the picture men get about women from porn is hardly one that is 'empowered female.' the example of what porn did for women...lesbian sex....erm, its again to satisfy the male consumers amongst whom watching lesbian sex is popular.... , to women lesbian sex only appeals if they are lesbian or bisexual, , so what has lesbian sex done for women appart from the lesbians and bisexual women who may still say that the way its directed is maybe from the angle a guy would like to see. i mean its like saying male gay sex empowers heteresexual men?????not to mention the women in the video may not be lesbian or bisexual, so therefore they're actually being forced into a different sexual orientation then they are, same with a lot of male prostitutes who are straight but go with a male client for money. gimme a break...and the other example you cited is woman on top...wow, from the billion selling industry all women get from porn is one - being on top. wow. im speechless, thank so much to porn industry. a woman finds her power in who she is, not who she is thru the eyes of the patriarchal sexual fantasy of her. oh well... if one wants to improve the industry, one must look what doesn't work and what is shit in that industry, otherwise you're just frankly putting sugar on shit. legalisation of it is not the magic wand of it, if it has to be restructured and changed completely. but by sweeping the dirt under the carpet will reallly not help.

yeah, its wage slavery worse then the other ones for sure, in other areas of work, you are selling off your skill and your energy to your employer, not parts of your body. the adjective 'privite' is not attached to those parts for nothing.

(well there are organ and blood donors, but people do that to save other's lives, not for money and those that do so for money, like some poor people in russia sell of their kidney for money, is lamentable and it had not been applauded in news-understandably)

as i said on thread, if we are controlled sexually, we are controlled human beings and no wonder govs can march to war with the blessing of our tax money -for you in usa, not even providing you with health care for all of you without squeezing more money out of you, without providing decent education for all, without adequate social services and leaving many people and children in poverty, now sex had been so cheapened that's its used to be our chain as much as the lack of it in the past. if you do not value and respect your sexuality, then you frankly do not value and respect yourself fully.

yeah, for many people it's fine to fuck without loving and caring, for many people its ok to watch people fucking for money without love or caring...and its their free choice, however freedom without responsibility is only child's play.

: Sara Jul 14 2005, 02:28 AM

[QUOTE]my friend is a freelance, his stuff was published in independent publications, the one he published about this, is some years back and I do no longer own it (when you move you throw a hell lot of stuff), not sure if it was accessible on line, but I shall contact him and try to get it here, but don't know when that is[/QUOTE]
That's ok LP, thanks for posting the articles smile.gif
[QUOTE]After all, I have seen some in my time and day, but frankly prefer making love to watching it...if the industry has its dark side, what's the point in trying pretend its not there? for example maybe not all your products at home are eco friendly and from company that is unethical, you can do it with a knowledge of that and nobody, least yourself have to judge you, but I guess if you are scared of that judment, you need to justify, that the product and the industry producing it, indeed is all innocent...[/QUOTE]
I am a bit surprised u watch (or used to watch) porn, given how much u opposed it in ur argument here. did u think it was degrading when u used to watch it?

Also, no one here said that the porn industry is innocent, and no one out of the ones I have spoken to about this are scared of being judged. I frankly do not care about what anyone has to say about me watching or not watching porn.

[QUOTE]Pornography is a part of our lives whether we like it or not. The social acceptance of porn, specifically the hardcore variety, is a growing trend in our society. As the stigma around this type of entertainment disappears, I have to ask myself, what effect is this having on my world?[/QUOTE]
I am uncertain how he defines "part of our lives". I do not think that porn is forced part of lives. If you do not watch it, I cannot be part of your life. We are not speaking of TV here... how many of us would really consider porn to be part of our lives? What does he mean "part of our lives"? I only saw a few, and I do not think it is part of my life.

How did he define "hardcore"? Also, how is he certain that there is a growing acceptance of porn? Why does it remain so sick and so hidden? At any rate, I would like to see more acceptance of legal porn, because it would be good to pull it from the underground. But I have already stated this several times.


[QUOTE]Many college students enjoy viewing porn, whether it is gay, straight, on video, the Internet or in magazines. I know a lot of people who like porn. The male viewers use it to help relieve stress, females use it to help get off and couples watch it together for a little romantic aid.[/quote]

That is fair enough. Did he speak to college students? Was that his sample? How large is the sample?

[Quote]Personally, I do not feel like I need it; when it comes to sex, I would rather do it than watch other people doing it for money.[/quote]

Nice to know he does not need porn. None of the ones I know how watch porn "need" it, though.
[Quote]The people I have talked to who enjoy porn do not see a problem with this form of entertainment. They say what they watch is harmless and those who work in the industry choose to do so. Besides, they get paid a lot of money! After all, U.S. porn revenues were larger than those of ABC, CBS and NBC in 2003 alone.[/QUOTE]
So the ones whom he has spoken to are strictly referring to legal and above board pornography, in which the actors are there by choice. This makes sense.

Wow larger than ABC, CBS, and NBC! Well I wouldn't be surprised

[QUOTE]One of the most well-known porn videos is Deep Throat, a classic 1970s flick. It depicts a girl who just loves to give head, but is tame compared with the hardcore stuff available today. However, according to the film's star Linda Lovelace, the film is basically a documentary of her rape from start to finish. She claims in her books Ordeal and Out of Bondage that she was forced by filmmakers to perform many sexual acts against her will. In the late 1980s the New York General Commission on Pornography put together an abundance of testimony on both sides of the issue. Though much of the testimony I read made me sick, one man's account stuck out. He stated "I, myself, have been on a couple sets where the young ladies have been forced to do even anal sex scenes with a guy which (sic) is rather large and I have seen them crying out in pain."[/QUOTE]

This is a horrific example of exploitation. There is absolutely no doubt about that. However, I do think that times have changed from the 1970s, in terms of sex and sexuality, and society's understanding of porn. The rights of workers, the concept of "choice" have changed. The definition of rape itself has changed since the 1970s. I mean the case was not brought up until the late 1980s. This just goes to show how society's values and morals have changed a lot from 1970s.

While I wonder how applicable these examples are to current times, I do think that even if one holds these examples as current enough, I think that they give us more reasons to bring porn to the surface. If it is visible, exploitation is less likely to take place.


[QUOTE]I have heard more than 70 percent of all porn stars have a history of sexual abuse, but finding information on these statistics is very hard. Not many people are willing to talk about the horrible and dark side of the porn industry. Although it's hard to deny those employed in the industry are engaged in some very unhealthy sexual behavior, many people may not realize crimes such as rape are sometimes committed during the filming of porn.[/QUOTE]
Has heard? unsure.gif well we need a little more concrete evidence than having "heard". Also many non-porn or non-sex workers engage in risky sexual behaviour. As for abuse in the industry, I've addressed this several times in this post already.

[quote]Aside from the problems within the industry, what effects does porn have on the world at large? Not any good effects, according to Diana Russel, Ph.D., who has conducted extensive research on pornography. One of her studies stated, "... the 25 to 30 percent of male students who admit that there is some likelihood they would rape a woman if they could be assured of getting away with it increased to 57 percent after exposure to sexually violent images."[/quote]

So this refers to violent porn? What about non-violent porn? Actually, exposure to violent images of any kind are said to increase likelihood of reacting violently to stimulants. You know, I have said this before, sopranos has a lot of sex and a lot of violence, so that too one could argue, can increase violent responses in young males.


[quote]I have little first-hand knowledge about the content of hardcore porn; however, this doesn't mean I don't know what's out there. I hear guys talk and I am constantly disgusted with the things I hear. "Girls Gone Wild" is bad enough with its idea of drunk chicks being taken advantage of, but it might as well be "Sesame Street" compared with some of the videos I know are available.[/quote]

Right, so here he is speaking of "hardcore" which I presume is the violent kind? I agree. Personally speaking I do not find violent sex appealing. However, before we ban it, I think extensive research must be conducted. I have no problem with placing regulations on porn. Every industry needs to be regulated.


[quote]I once overheard a former co-worker telling another guy about his favorite kind of porn, which involves gagging. It involves girls who are forced to perform oral sex until they choke and tears come out of their eyes. If this is not a depiction of rape, I don't know what is.[/quote]
Yep that sounds like rape. True, that is disgusting.


[quote]I'm sure there are many porn stars who just enjoy having sex, videos that don't involve depictions of rape and porn connoisseurs who never intend to commit rape. However, I still believe porn is a very negative aspect on how sexuality is viewed in our society and particularly influences how men perceive women.[/quote]

I do not think that porn will affect how men perceive woman unless those men have the predisposition to do so. Personally, every person I dated has watched porn and has at some point flicked through porn magazines, and they were all normal healthy young men.

Saying that porn will affect the way men see women ignores TV, music, sports, arts, cinema and every other public sphere that involves women. I am personally far more concerned with cleaning advertisement on TV and their depiction of women, than with porn.


[quote]After watching hours of porn depicting vapid women basically being raped and liking it, it's not hard to see why so many men see us as nothing more than objects. Do not get me wrong, I'm no prude. I just think sex should be consensual and kept in private between those involved - how ever many that may be. I'd rather not condone an unethical industry that promotes rape just to get guys' rocks off.[/quote]

I think that is a huge generalization. I also think that the cliché "women are objects" saying just does not cut it. And porn does not promote rape. Let's not get too emotive. He clearly is speaking of the rape porn variety, which I personally have not seen. In term of rape porn making guys want to rape girls, I am just a tad skeptical because this argument is used in attempts to ban eminem's music and violent video games, for the same reasons. But as I said, I am all for extensive studies on it.

Now in terms of porn that does depict consensual sex, I do not believe it objectifies women. What about women on top? Or women playing active roles in these films? And why is it objectifying women and not men? What is so sacred and private about women's bodies?

[quote]“Blow Bang #4” was in the “mainstream” section of a local adult video store. For a research project on the content of contemporary mass-marketed pornography, I asked the folks who work there to help me pick out typical videos rented by the typical customer. One of the 15 tapes I left with was “Blow Bang #4.”[/quote]

The thing with porn is it feeds into people's fantasies. The most private fantasies and this is why a lot just do not accept it. Now I have read what this porn film is about and the only thing that I found disturbing is this fantasy. BUT how many would actually go ahead with it? That is open for debate I think.

There is a line and there is a distinction between fantasy and reality. I know girls that fantasize about being raped. Does this mean they want to be raped? I do not think so.

As for calling the girl slut and bitch, well you can hear that in most prime time programmes. Watching them does not make guys use this terminology with the girls they are intimate with, unless they are brought up that way to begin with. And even in such case, one must be careful when one attempts to assert that watching porn will make this person actually refer to their partners using such words.

I cannot imagine that a guy with a healthy perception of women will call girls sluts just cause he watches porn films in which girls are referred to as sluts. Here, I am speaking from my experience of course.

[quote]Delusional,” a Vivid release in 2000, is another of the 15 tapes I viewed. In its final sex scene, the lead male character (Randy) professes his love for the female lead (Lindsay). After discovering that her husband had been cheating on her, Lindsay had been slow to get into another relationship, waiting for the right man -- a sensitive man -- to come along. It looked as if Randy was the man. “I’ll always be here for you no matter what,” Randy tells her. “I just want to look out for you.” Lindsay lets down her defences, and they embrace.[/quote]

That does sound a lot tamer than the one before. For sure.


[quote]Both represent a single pornographic mindset, in which male pleasure defines sex and female pleasure is a derivate of male pleasure. In pornography, women just happen to love exactly what men love to do to them, and what men love to do in pornography is to control and use, which allows the men who watch pornography to control and use as well[/quote]

Hmm I would have liked to see more examples… I do not think that these two are representative of all porn films. I do think that there are porn films out there in which women are more active and more assertive. Also, it can only get better with more women breaking into the industry as producers and directors.

[quote]When I do public talks on pornography and the feminist critique of the commercial sex industry, I describe -- but do not show -- these kinds of videos. I explain the other conventions of the industry, such as “double penetration,” the common practice in which a woman is penetrated by two men’s penises, vaginally and anally, at the same time, and in some of those scenes the woman also performs oral sex on a third man at the same time. I explain that virtually every sex scene ends with a man or men ejaculating onto a woman, most often in the face, what the industry calls a “facial.”[/quote]
There are girls that fantasize about "double penetration". Read Cosmopolitan, and the psychologist's review of it.

The man ejaculating sounds like the ultimate male fantasy doesn't it? If it's a recurring theme. So I guess this part feeds into the male fantasy. Again, I do think it's important to make the distinction between fantasy and reality. Just because a man likes to watch it happen because it feeds into his fantasy, I do not think that one can automatically assumes that this man will ask for it in real life or force it on the one who he's intimate with.


[quote]They ask me, over and over, “Why do men like this? What do you guys get from this?” They want to know why the mostly male consumers spend an estimated $10 billion a year on pornography in the United States and $56 billion around the world.[/quote]

You know, this is a really important point. Porn is just so profitable. Men (and women and couples) just watch it and enjoy it. A LOT of us do, and even A LOT MORE of men do. What does this mean, indeed? Does it mean that men are sick? Or twisted? I do not understand the taboo that surrounds something that so many people obviously watch. I cannot imagine all those people to be abnormal.

[quote]It is an important question with, no doubt, complex answers. What does is say about our society when men will take home a tape like “Blow Bang #4” and watch it, and masturbate to it? What does it say about our society’s conception of sexuality and masculinity that large numbers of men can find pleasure in watching a young woman gag while a penis is pushed into her throat followed by six men ejaculating on her face and in her mouth? Or that other men, who might find that scene too extreme, prefer to watch one man have sex with a woman that begins with tender words and ends with “Do you want me to fuck you in the ass?” and ejaculation on her breasts? What does it say that such a video, made for men to masturbate to, is considered classy and upscale?[/quote]

It feeds into the fantasy. I've already mentioned examples of fantasies commong to girls.

And why is "fuck me in the ass" so problematic? Is it the idea of asking for anal sex? Another taboo it seems. Would it have sounded nicer had the girl said "make love to me in the butt"? Please. Couples say worse things in private.


[quote]feminist critique of pornography is about more than pornography.[/quote]

I have to say that not all feminists are against porn. In addition, I think she implies that feminism is automatically anti-porn, but that is not always the case. I just thought I should clarify that.


[quote]That critique is not just a threat to the pornography industry or to the personal collections that men have stashed in their closets, but to everyone.[/quote]

So only men have porn collections? What about men that watch it but do not have a collection of it? Or women that watch it and have few in their closets? Or couples? Or gay men? It just seems to me that suddenly the heterosexual man has become the villain in all this.

[quote]“Why is this sexually pleasurable to you, and what kind of person does that make you?” And because heterosexual women live with men and men’s sexual desire, those women can’t escape the question -- either in terms of the desire of their boyfriends, partners, and husbands, or the way they have come to experience sexuality. That takes us way beyond magazines, movies, and computer screens, to the heart of who we are and how we live sexually and emotionally. That scares people. It probably should scare us. It has always scared me.[/quote]
The exact same question could be asked to girls who get off on the notion of being raped. I am not sure how many times I have said this, but there is a distinction between fantasy and reality, and a girl who thinks of rape touching herself does not automatically in any way shape or form mean that she likes to be raped in real life and it does not mean that she is submissive.

Is the human sexuality scary? Probably. Why else would porn be seen this much problematic…?

[quote]"I went to a porno bookstore, put a quarter in a slot, and saw this porn movie. It was just a guy coming up from behind a girl and attacking her and raping her. That's when I started having rape fantasies. When I saw that movie, it was like somebody lit a fuse from my childhood on up... I just went for it, went out and raped." Rapist interviewed by Beneke, 1982, pp. 73-74.[/quote]

So watching violent movies is going to make people go and kill? I cannot imagine someone truly trying to push for this argument. This is ridiculous! If a guy is a rapist or is predisposed to rape, he will rape even if he didn't watch porn! How many men watch porn out there? How many men rape? You and I both know MANY MANY men out there watch porn. How many men rape?


[quote]A simple application of the laws of social learning suggests that viewers of pornography can develop arousal responses to depictions of rape, murder, child sexual abuse, or other assaultive behavior. Researcher S. Rachman of the Institute of Psychiatry, Maudsley Hospital, London, has demonstrated that male subjects can learn to become sexually aroused by seeing a picture of a woman's boot after repeatedly seeing women's boots in association with sexually arousing slides of nude females (Rachman and Hodgson, 1968). The laws of learning that operated in the acquisition of the boot fetish can also teach males who were not previously aroused by depictions of rape to become so. All it may take is the repeated association of rape with arousing portrayals of female nudity (or clothed females in provocative poses).[/quote]

First off, it is never the case of simple application. Social learning is a complex topic. And I have to ask again, what kind of porn are they speaking about? Rape porn or what exactly… and how can one conduct such research? It sounds slightly unethical, but that is not our topic. And to be aroused by scenes of rape does not make one go out and rape.

[quote]Even for males who are not sexually excited during movie portrayals of rape, masturbation subsequent to the movie reinforces the association. This constitutes what R.J. McGuire, J.M. Carlisle and B.G. Young refer to as "masturbatory conditioning" (Cline, 1974, p. 210). The pleasurable experience of orgasm--an expected and planned--for activity in many pornography parlors--is an exceptionally potent reinforcer. The fact that pornography is widely used by males as ejaculation material is a major factor that differentiates it from other mass media, intensifying the lessons that male consumers learn from it.[/quote]

The thing with sexual fantasy is that it is just as common to fantasize about being the dominant one as it to fantasize about being dominated. It does not mean that this is how one will actually act in real life.


[quote]Malamuth classified 29 male students as sexually force-oriented or non-force-oriented on the basis of their responses to a questionnaire (1981a). These students were then randomly assigned to view either a rape version or a mutally consenting version of a slide-audio presentation. The account of rape and accompanying pictures were based on a story in a popular pornographic magazine, which Malamuth describes as follows[/quote]

I have already addressed the issue of rape and porn. But I just have to comment on the size of the sample. I'm sorry but N=29 is far too small to be able to generalise to the population.

[quote]As the rape version of the slide-audio presentation is typical of what is seen in pornography, the results of this experiment suggests that similar pornographic depictions are likely to generate rape fantasies even in previously non-force-oriented consumers. As Edna Einsiedel points out (1986, p. 60)[/quote]

Rape fantasies. Bingo.


[quote]Current evidence suggests a high correlation between deviant fantasies and deviant behaviours....Some treatment methods are also predicated on the link between fantasies and behaviour by attempting to alter fantasy patterns in order to change the deviant behaviours (1986, p. 60).[/quote]

Correlation is NOT causation. So just because A correlates with B it does not mean that A caused B or vice versa. It is equally plausible to argue that A and B share a common factor, say C which leads to them correlating.

[quote]Unfortunately, many of the behaviours modeled in pornography do subordinate and violate women, sometimes viciously.[/quote]

And somehow, men cannot distinction between good new ideas and bad new ideas? Of course there are sick abnormal men out there, but really do they represent the male population? It seems to me that this model suggests that men are naïve impressionable children. Something I obviously do not agree with.

[quote]I agree to act out in private a lot of the scenarios that my husband read to me. These depicted bondage and different sexual acts that I found humiliating to do... He read the pornography like a textbook, like a journal. When he finally convinced me to be bound, he read in the magazine how to tie the knots and bind me in a way that I couldn't escape. Most of the scenes where I had to dress up or go through different fantasies were the exact same scenes that he has read in the magazines.[/quote]
[QUOTE]
One should never agree to do anything one is uncomfortable with. Also, it sounds like her partner is obsessed with porn. There is a difference between casually flicking through porn mags or videos to get off or get news [good] ideas and between obsession. Obsession is not normal so we should not generalise it and make it the norm. [/QUOTE]

[quote] brought pornographic magazines, books, and paraphernalia into the bedroom with him and told her that if she did not perform the sexual acts in the "dirty" books and magazines, he would beat her and kill her.[/quote]
Ok so she's married to a psychopath.

[quote] were forced constantly to enact specific scenes that men had witnessed in pornography... These men... would set up scenarios, usually with more than one woman, to copy scenes that they had seen portrayed in magazines and books. [For example, Ms. S quoted a woman in her group as saying:] "He held up a porn magazine with a picture of a beaten woman and said, 'I want you to look like that. I want you to hurt.' He then began beating me. When I did not cry fast enough, he lit a cigarette and held it right above my breast for a long time before he burned me."[/quote]
Sadism or sadomasochism is a problem. A psychological problem. What those men did is a criminal act. Just to make things clear here.

[quote]When children do what they see in pornography, it is even more improbable than in the case of adults to attribute their behavior entirely to their predispositions.[/quote]

Children should not be viewing porn. And that is that. So for the rest of the article I am not going to comment on any studies on minors watching porn, coz that does not concern me. I do not think it is ok for children/minors to watch it so I do not see why I have to respond to it here.

[quote]The sexual violence material portrayed scenes of sexual intercourse involving a woman strapped to a table and being penetrated by a large plastic penis.[/quote]

I've read in Cosmopolitan once, in one of their recurring sex-specials, a lady who said she uses cucumbers. The psychologist said it was normal. I think the issue that is disturbing to most people is that porn just makes it all public. It all surfaces and it's so uncomfortable for many people. There's something so inherently dirty about human sexuality, it seems.


[quote]The sexually explicit dehumanizing but non-violent material portrayed scenes of sexual activity that included a man sitting on top of a woman and masturbating into her face.[/quote]

So what about porn films that do not involve that? Are they seen as degrading? What about the possibility of this scenario taking place behind closed doors involving two consenting adults? Is it seen as degrading?

[quote]The sexually explicit non-degrading material portrayed sexual activities leading up to heterosexual intercourse (Check and Guloien, 1989).[/quote]

Would anal sex fall under that?


[quote]Check and Guloien's experiment revealed that the viewing of both the non-violent dehumanizing materials as well as the violent materials resulted in male subjects reporting a significantly greater likelihood of engaging in rape or other coercive sex acts than the control group.[/quote]

The sample size is problematic. Also, when one is aroused, one is likely to say things that one may not necessarily go ahead and do. There is a problem with the above statement. I'm surprised they even got away making this assertion.


[quote]Although self-reported likelihood of raping is not a proper measure of desire to rape, as it also indicates that the internal inhibitions against acting out rape desires have been undermined to some extent, Check and Guloien's experiment does offer tentative support for my theoretical model's claim that pornography sexualizes dominance and submission.[/quote]

You do not need to watch porn to think of dominance and submission as sexy. And I am unsure why it's such a problem if couples consent to and enjoy these "kinky" things.

[quote] In addition, it makes theoretical sense that sexualizing dominance and submission would probably be generalized to include eroticizing rape and/or other sexually abusive behavior for some males. For example, Ms. S. testified at the Minnesota Hearings that: "Men constantly witness the abuse of women in pornography and if they can't engage in that behavior with their wives, girlfriends, or children, they force a whore to do it" (Russell, 1993a)[/quote]
What about the ones that do not engage in these behaviors? What about the ones that can make the distinctions? It clearly says "some" so why attempt to create so much fear of porn? How many watch it and how many are willing to go out there and "force whores" to do things?!

[quote]Further research is needed on this issue, and more researchers need to follow the lead of the Canadian researchers in going beyond the distinction between violent and non-violent pornography, and distinguishing also between non-violent degrading pornography and erotica.[/quote]

DUH! The distinctions should have been made in this research!

[quote] (In fact, it was not particularly massive: 4 hours and 48 minutes per week over a period of six weeks.) These researchers, unlike Malamuth and Donnerstein, focus on trying to ascertain the effects of non-violent pornography and, in the study to be described, they use a sample drawn from a non-student adult population.[/quote]

That is a lot of porn. In my view anyway. Also, good to know they went after non-students.

[quote]Zillmann and Bryant found that a desire for stronger material was fostered in their subjects. "Consumers graduate from common to less common forms of pornography," Zillman maintains, that is, to more violent and more degrading materials (1984, p. 127). Zillmann suggests this may be "because familiar material becomes unexciting as a result of habituation" (1984, p.127).[/quote]

Similar effects happen with addictions. So perhaps wanting to view more and more violent ones is just a result of being addicted to the stuff. I mean they were put in an experiment in which they were watching porn as a habit or on regular basis. I must say, it's strange that this passed through committee of ethics.

[quote]According to Zillmann and Bryant's research, then, pornography can transform a male who was not previously interested in the more abusive types of pornography, into one who is turned on by such material. [/quote]

No, it does not. What it shows is watching A LOT of porn (in which case one could argue it becomes an obsession) is likely to make men to seek more violent types of porn.

Also, it does not show that wanting to watch violent ones, or being turned on by violent ones is going to make them go out there and rape.


[quote]This is consistent with Malamuth's findings (described on p. 53) that males who did not previously find rape sexually arousing, generate such fantasies after being exposed to a typical example of violent pornography[/quote]
malamuth needs to conduct research on girls who find the rape fantasy arousing.


in conclusion, there is a difference between violent ones and none violent ones. while i have problems with the violent ones and while i do think we need tougher regulations on them, with all that, i still do not believe that they turn men into rapists.

i truely think that the reason why porn is just so controversial is because suddenly our very private fantasies are just being made on films. the distinctions between public and private are just very blurrd in porn.

also, sorry bout the fucked quotes... the quote buttong doesnt seem to want to work. sorry!

: Sara Jul 14 2005, 02:39 AM

[QUOTE][quote=defiance,Jul 12 2005, 05:19 PM]
So then if you are against ever enforcing your morals, would you say that there should be laws against adults having sex with ten-year-old children? I have heard stories (some of them posted on this board by the way) of ten-year-old kids having sex with other kids abotu the same age. There' all kinds of crazy stuff like that. So say you have some 10 or 11-year-old kid who wants to have sex, and he/she consents to it with say a 30-year-old. Is that okay? As long as "both parties agree" right? Wouldn't that be pushing your morals on other people to not allow them to do that?[/QUOTE]
wait, ur comparing consenting adults engaging in sex and consenting adults watching porn, to children doing the same?

are you serious? do u know why we have laws against that? it's not just "morals", it's because extensive psychological research (and sheer common sense) has shown that children do not possess the mental maturity that adults posess and so therefore they cannot make adult or mature decisions about sex.

[QUOTE]So you'r telling me you would not be fazed seeing people having sex in open public areas, say at the park or something? Cause I don't see any problem with two people kissing or making out or whatever in public like that, but that would freak me out to see the other. There is a clear difference, however much you may ridiculously try to deny there is, cause they're both just "acts of affection," and any honest person shoudl realize that. Unless you have no problem with the scenario I just described?
[/QUOTE]

are you serious or are you just trying to save face?

first off, i can imagine sex in public would frighten you. but how is sex in public in any way similar to consenting adults watching porn in private? and wait, casual sex and onenightstands do not need to take place in public for them to be called casual... so i fail to see why ur bringing sex in public into all this... blink.gif

listen, i have no interest in continuing a discussion with u unless u got something new to say about porn. u seem to think that ur morals and ur views are superior to others' (they arent by the way), and well trying to have a discussion with someone who automatically thinks his morals are the ones to be followed, well it's fruitless, to say the least smile.gif

: Sara Jul 14 2005, 02:51 AM

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 13 2005, 07:32 AM)
sara,  the women in porn are not degraded is strange in view how many women do degrading acts in porn movies - even if you don't watch those, they are part of that industry, and to say otherwise is blind leading,and somehow bought into the box set of telling you that they 'like it',  and  the picture men get about women from porn is hardly one that is 'empowered female.' the example of what porn did for women...lesbian sex....erm, its again to satisfy the male consumers amongst whom  watching lesbian sex is popular.... , to women lesbian sex only appeals if they are lesbian or bisexual, , so what has lesbian sex done for women appart from the lesbians and bisexual women who may still say that the way its directed is maybe from the angle a guy would like to see. i mean its like saying male gay sex empowers heteresexual men?????not to mention the women in the video may not be lesbian or bisexual, so therefore they're actually being forced into a different sexual orientation then they are, same with a lot of male prostitutes who are straight but go with a male client for money. gimme a break...and the other example you cited is woman on top...wow, from the billion selling industry all women get from porn is one - being on top.  wow. im speechless, thank so much to porn industry.  a woman finds her power in who she is, not who she is thru the eyes of the patriarchal sexual fantasy of her. oh well... if one wants to improve the industry, one must look what doesn't work and what is shit in that industry, otherwise you're just frankly putting sugar on shit. legalisation of it is not the magic wand of it, if it has to be restructured and changed completely. but by sweeping the dirt under the carpet will reallly not help.


yeah, for many people it's fine to fuck without loving and caring, for many people its ok to watch people fucking for money without love or caring...and its their free choice, however freedom without responsibility is only child's play.
[right][snapback]182377[/snapback][/right]


at least porn brought lesbian into the screen. at least in porn, being lesbian is not disgusting and deviant. and so what if men watch it coz they like it? so do women! lesbian and bisexual women watch it, and they r women, so it does cater for them. and how do u know straight women dont get turned on by lesbian porn?

what about gay men watching gay porn? is that degrading to gay men?

what about legal porn in which all parties are consenting, is it still degrading? who would it be degrading to and why would it be degrading?

and oh porn actresses can fake it and perform acts on other women. if they are forced that's a whole different story. but all through my argument i have been speaking about consent. now, if a porn actress does not want to do this, get out. get help, and get out of the industry. but let's not assume they're all victims.

lesbian and gay porn (and yes women in dominant roles) are all overlooked. in all ur examples and those two pieces of research, the focus was on violent-against-women variety. no wonder u'r gonna think it's degrading, with all these biased examples. you can't just reduce porn into that blob of violent varieties.

and oh why did u used to watch porn if ur against it? where u not against it before?

at least i am willing to acknowledge that there are problems rolleyes.gif

in any event, i am so tired of repeating myself. if you got anything new to say that u have not said before, then i might check it out. for now, i am so tired of reading the same argument written in so many different ways.

: Moremi Jul 14 2005, 05:47 AM

QUOTE
When I do public talks on pornography and the feminist critique of the commercial sex industry, I describe -- but do not show -- these kinds of videos. I explain the other conventions of the industry, such as “double penetration,” the common practice in which a woman is penetrated by two men’s penises, vaginally and anally, at the same time, and in some of those scenes the woman also performs oral sex on a third man at the same time. I explain that virtually every sex scene ends with a man or men ejaculating onto a woman, most often in the face, what the industry calls a “facial.”

I really wanted to stay out of this discussion but this made me laugh. This behavior didn’t start with the porn industry. This has been going on since the beginning of time. Look at Roman culture and other cultures in the world and some ancient texts. People have always looked for ways to share information to improve their sex lives and relationships. Is the Kama Sutra porn? It talks about three-ways and various sexual positions. Many people consider it art.

What consenting adults do behind closed doors or in their bedrooms, to enhance their love making, is their business. It only becomes an issue for me when it’s not consensual or when children are exposed to it.

Edit: Oh and for the record, so there is no confusion, I'm not saying I agree with what happened in Roman society or other cultures. And if I'm repeating what's been said ... sorry ... I can't read these long responses right now tongue.gif

: zapatista Jul 14 2005, 08:45 PM

QUOTE(Moremi @ Jul 14 2005, 08:47 AM)
QUOTE
When I do public talks on pornography and the feminist critique of the commercial sex industry, I describe -- but do not show -- these kinds of videos. I explain the other conventions of the industry, such as “double penetration,” the common practice in which a woman is penetrated by two men’s penises, vaginally and anally, at the same time, and in some of those scenes the woman also performs oral sex on a third man at the same time. I explain that virtually every sex scene ends with a man or men ejaculating onto a woman, most often in the face, what the industry calls a “facial.”

I really wanted to stay out of this discussion but this made me laugh. This behavior didn’t start with the porn industry. This has been going on since the beginning of time. Look at Roman culture and other cultures in the world and some ancient texts. People have always looked for ways to share information to improve their sex lives and relationships. Is the Kama Sutra porn? It talks about three-ways and various sexual positions. Many people consider it art.

What consenting adults do behind closed doors or in their bedrooms, to enhance their love making, is their business. It only becomes an issue for me when it’s not consensual or when children are exposed to it.

Edit: Oh and for the record, so there is no confusion, I'm not saying I agree with what happened in Roman society or other cultures. And if I'm repeating what's been said ... sorry ... I can't read these long responses right now tongue.gif
[right][snapback]182642[/snapback][/right]

I was thinking the exact thing you said.... laughing.gif

Where do you think they get the ideas for the stuff they do in porn anyhoo? It's stuff people have been doing FOREVER... nothing new.

si si ... What Moremi said. blackhair.gif

: Sara Jul 14 2005, 11:54 PM

QUOTE(Moremi @ Jul 15 2005, 01:47 AM)
I really wanted to stay out of this discussion but this made me laugh. This behavior didn’t start with the porn industry. This has been going on since the beginning of time. Look at Roman culture and other cultures in the world and some ancient texts. People have always looked for ways to share information to improve their sex lives and relationships. Is the Kama Sutra porn? It talks about three-ways and various sexual positions. Many people consider it art.
[right][snapback]182642[/snapback][/right]


yeah that's true. pornographic litareture (sp?) is also present in ancient chinese culture...

hmm that's a good point

edit: some argue that it's erotic lit rather than pornographic, but the lines are pretty blurred at times.

: Lostphoenix Jul 15 2005, 01:32 AM

yes, and books are breathing living things! its real people in them....erm...

yes, in roman times we had crucifixion, we have death penalty in some nations, we had war, so we still do, we had empire that had slaughtered natives and wiped their culture to replace it with theirs. yes, we are still up to those tricks, except at those days we had no dvds, vcrs, televisions and while they had sexual diseases too, we do have HIV to recon with. you got companies that cater to the viewrs view that condoms they don't wanna see, so the actors don't use condoms and have a future of dying with that disease? i don't have a loved one who died from AIDS, but i can imagine the prospect of oneself slowly dying, is something to recon.



if porn was ethical, those people not subjected to what they are, and had a choice in what they say yes and no to, and the perverted versions rooted out, i'd have
no problems with it, but the fact is its not that way because people are buying, not demanding to change. people can boycott GM foods, but the same won't go for porn, the debate there is so divided, because people keep mistaking it for attitudes towards sex, not porn. they use it as a statement of their attitude towards sex, when this is not about your attitude towards sex, but about the shit that goes in that industry. and saying...oh, i know its got problems, but not talking about them, not bringing them to light, is sweeping them under the carpet.

you talk about consent, one thing is sexual consent, the other is economic consent. those people are not giving sexual consent, they're selling that to porn industry who sells it on.

why aren't you in porn, why don't you do that job? if that is nothing different then any other? do you think they'd feel different then you? they just live in different circumstances and in those they give consent to money to override their own sexual consent.



think of a time you had done something that you didn't want, but went ahead ? felt great heh? it doesn't matter if those people feel that way, it looks different to you, because its been dressed up nice and you can't see and feel their feelings.

: Holter Jul 15 2005, 01:46 AM

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 15 2005, 02:32 AM)
if porn was ethical[right][snapback]182843[/snapback][/right]


This is based on whose ethics? I know for a fact, an actual fact, that people in the world dont all live by the same ethics or morals. So for one person to think that a certain activity is unethical, and to decide that it should be outlawed based on their own ethics or morals is completely unethical to me.


: Lostphoenix Jul 15 2005, 02:05 AM

laws of your country are enforced on you. they are your nations morals and ethicals, so are they unethical to be enforced on you?


i think it could be commonly agreed that subjecting children to sex is not on.

some people may get turned on by rape, but should that be depicted on tape for their satisfaction? is violence not generally punished by law? isn't rape a criminal offence? if violence is ethical, then there's nothing wrong with that in porn too.

etc.


I really wanted to stay out of this discussion
(yeah quotes don't work out here too)

heh, that was my point too, strangely enough is what i tell myself with a lot of discussions...



: Holter Jul 15 2005, 02:19 AM

wallbash.gif

Man I should probably just stop posting in this thread. laughing.gif

: Sara Jul 15 2005, 02:44 AM

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 15 2005, 09:32 PM)
yes, and books are breathing living things! its real people in them....erm...
[right][snapback]182843[/snapback][/right]


wait, does that mean you are ok with pornographic books, because they don't have "real people"...?




i am not addressing your other points, because i have addressed them previously, as i do not wish to repeat myself.

: Lostphoenix Jul 15 2005, 02:53 AM




do i need to repeat myself though, sara?


that i object to what is wrong in my opinion in porn really means i'm a nun on crusade, right. wacko.gif

: Sara Jul 15 2005, 03:03 AM

no not at all. not a nun, just a repetitive confused person. smile.gif

good bye wavenew.gif


i'll let you have the last word, if you really really want to. smile2.gif

: Lostphoenix Jul 15 2005, 03:33 AM

that's reall kind of you thanks sara. i certainly approciate your accute judment of me. im too selfish to give you mine judgement of you.

: Moremi Jul 15 2005, 04:37 AM

LP, the point I was making is that pornography has always existed. When I mentioned Roman culture … I wasn’t talking about crucifixations blink.gif The Romans had orgies on stage (and worse) … that was entertaining for them. I’m sure if the technology existed where they could record and distribute it back then, they would have. But paintings and literature were the only mediums they had. We may consider it art now but it was viewed as pornography by the church and other groups back then.

People have always enjoyed watching other people have sex. The only thing that has changed over time is that there is more of it. So the point that was made in this thread about bringing it out of the underground so laws can be enforced, is the one that makes the most sense to me because it's not going away.

Anyway, I hope my position is clear now ... off to work wavenew.gif

: Lostphoenix Jul 15 2005, 05:00 AM

QUOTE(Moremi @ Jul 15 2005, 12:37 PM)
LP, the point I was making is that pornography has always existed. When I mentioned Roman culture … I wasn’t talking about crucifixations blink.gif The Romans had orgies on stage (and worse) … that was entertaining for them. I’m sure if the technology existed where they could record and distribute it back then, they would have. But paintings and literature were the only mediums they had. We may consider it art now but it was viewed as pornography by the church and other groups back then.

People have always enjoyed watching other people have sex. The only thing that has changed over time is that there is more of it. So the point that was made in this thread about bringing it out of the underground so laws can be enforced, is the one that makes the most sense to me because it's not going away.

Anyway, I hope my position is clear now ... off to work wavenew.gif
[right][snapback]182867[/snapback][/right]



yeah, roman emperors slept with their sisters, their mothers, don't get me started on caligula.

People have always enjoyed watching other people have sex apparently,in celtic cultures, they made love anywhere fancy took them, be it on their own, or in a middle of tribe's gathering, when guys came back from war, with battle. madness, women bared their breasts and apparently that got the men sane again. but that apparently does have to do something with infancy mode.

So the point that was made in this thread about bringing it out of the underground so laws can be enforced, is the one that makes the most sense to me because it's not going away.

i never disagreed with that. i had to repeat myself since my points were getting misunderstood-not by you moremi, you as usual debate in respectful manner. i was bringing out points that would need to be looked at if there was law enforcement. it needs change, but saying one sees a need for a change, means one is against it? nah.

: defiance Jul 15 2005, 01:02 PM

QUOTE(Sara @ Jul 14 2005, 05:39 AM)
QUOTE(defiance @ Jul 12 2005, 05:19 PM)
So then if you are against ever enforcing your morals, would you say that there should be laws against adults having sex with ten-year-old children? I have heard stories (some of them posted on this board by the way) of ten-year-old kids having sex with other kids abotu the same age. There' all kinds of crazy stuff like that. So say you have some 10 or 11-year-old kid who wants to have sex, and he/she consents to it with say a 30-year-old. Is that okay? As long as "both parties agree" right? Wouldn't that be pushing your morals on other people to not allow them to do that?


wait, ur comparing consenting adults engaging in sex and consenting adults watching porn, to children doing the same?

are you serious? do u know why we have laws against that? it's not just "morals", it's because extensive psychological research (and sheer common sense) has shown that children do not possess the mental maturity that adults posess and so therefore they cannot make adult or mature decisions about sex.


What about a fourteen-year-old? Certainly there are matrue fourteen-year-olds. And also nto to mention that there are tons of immature adults. I would even say the massive market for pornography is proof of that very assertion. And couldn't someone argue that it should be fine if the fourteen-year-old consents? After all, soem could call you're view of what "maturity" arbitrary and your own personal view, just as you say my "morals" are.

QUOTE
QUOTE
So you'r telling me you would not be fazed seeing people having sex in open public areas, say at the park or something? Cause I don't see any problem with two people kissing or making out or whatever in public like that, but that would freak me out to see the other. There is a clear difference, however much you may ridiculously try to deny there is, cause they're both just "acts of affection," and any honest person shoudl realize that. Unless you have no problem with the scenario I just described?


are you serious or are you just trying to save face?

first off, i can imagine sex in public would frighten you. but how is sex in public in any way similar to consenting adults watching porn in private? and wait, casual sex and onenightstands do not need to take place in public for them to be called casual... so i fail to see why ur bringing sex in public into all this... blink.gif


I mentioned it because you and Hotler were saying that there is no difference between making out and having sex. If that is the case, I ask, would you be fine with people having sex in public? Or are you completely against anyone ever kissing in public? My point is that there is a clear difference between kissing and sex.

QUOTE
listen, i have no interest in continuing a discussion with u unless u got something new to say about porn. u seem to think that ur morals and ur views are superior to others'  (they arent by the way), and well trying to have a discussion with someone who automatically thinks his morals are the ones to be followed, well it's fruitless, to say the least smile.gif
[right][snapback]182616[/snapback][/right]

Well no kidding! Of course I wil lthink mine superior, THEY'RE MY MORALS! Do you know what morals are? They are a person's beliefs abotu what is right and what is wrong. Obviously I will think mine superior if I believe somethign is wrogn and you have no problem with it, just as you would naturally feel the same way towards mine. Unless you don't even have morals, in which case I would say you are blissfully ignorant. But I think i can safely say that is not the case, since you believe things such as child-pornography or child-sex are wrong (which I agree with). So don't tell me I need to stop thinking my mroals are superior, and start showing how they are not.

And thanks for compeltely ignoring my main point, which is that both pornography and prostitution are the worst forms of wage-slavery, because you are literally sellign your body for money. And since you claim to be against wage-slavery, it seems extremely hypocritical to then saay not just that you believe it should be legal (which I could possibly understand from certain views), but indeed that you actually think it's perfectly fine. I udnerstand that not all of our morals can be made into law, and that one could make that argument with porgnography -- but to say that even from your own personal moral perspective there is nothing wrong with pornography, is, well, like I alread said, extremely hypocritical from someone who is against wage-slavery.

If you have problem with debating with me simply because I believe in right and wrong and you supposedly don't, then that's your own problem and I frankly don't care. If you really believe that right and wrong are just relative and everything is a matter of personal opinion, than I'd say you are delusional. This is a debate about whether or not pornography and prostitution are wrong, and why that is. If you don't believe in morals, what are you doing on a debate about them?

: Sara Jul 15 2005, 09:54 PM

QUOTE(defiance @ Jul 16 2005, 09:02 AM)
Well no kidding! Of course I wil lthink mine superior, THEY'RE MY MORALS!
[right][snapback]182905[/snapback][/right]


wow, so refreshing to encounter fascists on this board. oh wait... mellow.gif

of course morals are relative. i am not gonna come to this forum to show YOU how your morals are not superior to others. to even believe that they are is just narrow. to respect other people's morals does not mean you have to agree with it, but to understand that it is just as valid. but then again, like i said, you got a lot ahead of you. as for me having morals or not, the fact that you question it is a bit of joke, but hey it's ok kid.

and oh, psychological research has proven that children (including 14 yr olds) lack the mental maturity adults possess, so their decisions with regards to adult things are going to be childish, because, guess what? they are children. so it's not mere morals, and it's not some arbitrary argument.

meh i'm done.

: Holter Jul 15 2005, 10:51 PM

QUOTE(defiance @ Jul 15 2005, 02:02 PM)
What about a fourteen-year-old?


Why do you always have to resort to arguing about the extreme and of the spectrum when you are debating? Its like, if someone brings up a good point about capitalism, like i have in the past - the first thing i have to hear about is slave labor in a third world country. OF COURSE ITS A BAD THING, but its not everything. And you relating the ENTIRE PORN INDUSTRY to some guy who likes to shoot "midget 14 year old rape porn" - how the fuck is someone supposed to take an argument seriously with someone else when they insiston taking the extreme as their focus? I personally wont even respond to that, not because i dont know what to say, or something like that - but for the simple fact that arguing about the extreme points is basically ludicrous.

QUOTE
I mentioned it because you and Hotler were saying that there is no difference between making out and having sex. If that is the case, I ask, would you be fine with people having sex in public? Or are you completely against anyone ever kissing in public? My point is that there is a clear difference between kissing and sex.


Well when I mentioned the kissing equivilence to sex, it was in return to your comment or someone elses comment about sexual intimacy, and how it is something that shouldnt be done - and i was pointing out to you that for a lot of people, kissing is a more intimate thing than having sex is - but you took it an ran with the OMGBUT WHUT ABOUT SEX IN TEH PARK IN PUBLIC nonsense. Its not about the physical difference between the two.

QUOTE
Well no kidding! Of course I wil lthink mine superior, THEY'RE MY MORALS! Do you know what morals are? They are a person's beliefs abotu what is right and what is wrong. Obviously I will think mine superior if I believe somethign is wrogn and you have no problem with it, just as you would naturally feel the same way towards mine. Unless you don't even have morals, in which case I would say you are blissfully ignorant. But I think i can safely say that is not the case, since you believe things such as child-pornography or child-sex are wrong (which I agree with). So don't tell me I need to stop thinking my mroals are superior, and start showing how they are not.


Wow, this is a whole new side to defiance. Now we have the fascist moral highground defiance. If you dont believe in your own morals, then they are not your own...but to completely toss aside someone elses morals, or believe that yours are the end all to all beliefs is one step into a fascist world. I think we are all very opinionated on this site, but I also thought that this was a place to learn something - not to stand with a fist in the air, and your ego in the other. You need to stop thinking your morals are superior, and start thinking that your morals are your morals, and ours are ours.

QUOTE
And thanks for compeltely ignoring my main point, which is that both pornography and prostitution are the worst forms of wage-slavery, because you are literally sellign your body for money. And since you claim to be against wage-slavery, it seems extremely hypocritical to then saay not just that you believe it should be legal (which I could possibly understand from certain views), but indeed that you actually think it's perfectly fine. I udnerstand that not all of our morals can be made into law, and that one could make that argument with porgnography -- but to say that even from your own personal moral perspective there is nothing wrong with pornography, is, well, like I alread said, extremely hypocritical from someone who is against wage-slavery.


I dont see how this makes any sense though - your saying that its wage-slavery because they are selling your body for money - but by that logic every job is a form of wage-slavery. What about the guy who works for a moving van lines, who each day subjects his body to physical harm by lifting couches, walking up and down stairs with file cabinets. I mean, all he really is is a body to move things, and people are paying him to use that body to do stuff. You could really insert anything into that metaphor - so really i dont think that that argument holds any water. You just seem to believe that a persons intimate relations should be a private matter - and if someone has no problem with freely expressing themselves in a sexual manner is wrong. And now you are trying to justify it with calling pornography slave labor (while every porn star ive run into is fucking wealthy, and happy - male and female) and exploitation - completely ignoring the fact that what you do for a living is your choice, not someone elses. I disagree in principal to that.

QUOTE
If you have problem with debating with me simply because I believe in right and wrong and you supposedly don't, then that's your own problem and I frankly don't care. If you really believe that right and wrong are just relative and everything is a matter of personal opinion, than I'd say you are delusional. This is a debate about whether or not pornography and prostitution are wrong, and why that is. If you don't believe in morals, what are you doing on a debate about them?
[right][snapback]182905[/snapback][/right]


This is downright laughable.

: defiance Jul 15 2005, 10:52 PM

Um, you don't seem to understand what morals are. Relative beleifs are called opinions, somethign you personally think but are not convicted of. A moral is a conviction, somethign you beleive in deeply. If you don't believe in anything beyond a level of opinion, that's called having no morals. It's not about me thinking I know all right and wrong, it's simply about me having my strong beliefs as opposed to my opinions. For instance, it is my opinion that Rage Agains the Machine was a really good band, in terms of how good the music sounded, and was a billion times better than say, Lip Bizskit... that's an opinion, based on my personal musical taste. But it is my firm belief that it is absolutely wrong to kill another human being except in self-defense. Is it fascist of me to say that murderers are evil and have sick morals? Do I really even give a shit if you think I am fascist because of it?

Now that we've cleared that up, let's see if you're ready to finally respond to what I said about wage-slavery and how prostitution and porn are the worst forms of it. And on the 14-year-old thing, you still don't get my point.... Who are you to decide that just because they are less mature that it is wrong for them to have sex? I guarantee you that most 20-year-olds today are less mature than say most 40-year-olds. But that doesn't mean that 20-year-olds shouldn't ever have sex. Clearly you have some kind of deep moral conviction that is based on more than just "well to each their own." And if it really just an opinion, than what you are basically saying that you don't personally think it's very smart, but hey, if a 14-year-old and a 40-year-old agree to have sex, who is one of us to say they can't.

To tell the truth, the fact that you claim first to have morals and then that your morals are only "opinion" is the real joke to me. It's a complete contradiction in the English language. But hey, it's okay, we "kids" are always very understanding when "mature" adults get confused. I sympathize with you, cause I sure would hate to be so poor intellectually myself.

: Holter Jul 15 2005, 10:57 PM

I also feel like this argument has taken so many turns I have no idea what LP and defiance are actually arguing these days other than their own morals, in fact it feels like they are just arguing to argue against. ermm.gif

: Sara Jul 15 2005, 10:59 PM

QUOTE(defiance @ Jul 16 2005, 06:52 PM)
Um, you don't seem to understand what morals are. Relative beleifs are called opinions, somethign you personally think but are not convicted of. A moral is a conviction, somethign you beleive in deeply.
[right][snapback]182997[/snapback][/right]


morals are deeply held convictions, it does not mean they are absolute, and that is what i meant by relative. they r not universal and they r not absolute.

as for being intellectually poor, well hunny it's not too late, ur only 17, u can always improve, read more is a good start.

: defiance Jul 16 2005, 08:36 PM

Holter - of course I am arguing morals, that's what almost all of my debates here are about. Morals are our beliefs about right and wrong. So if I think it's wrong for someone to sell their body for money, that's my belief, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with me persuadign others to believe in it also. Whether or not I would make pornography or prostitution illegal. There's two issues here: whether pornography is morally wrong; and whether it should be made illegal. My answer to both questions is yes, because it is not just morally wrong in the sense that some would say pre-marital sex is (not saying I do necessarily, just giving an example). I believe it is one of the worst forms of wage-slavery and turning people into mere tools there is, and it thus contributes to the wage-slavery-based capitalist system. Now it may be somewhat crossing the line of the law itnerferign in personal activities, but I really don't care. The issue to me is that it massively contributes to this sickenign system, even if it is underground.

So again, if you have a problem with my points, than respond, but don't just go "well that's your own morals" and shrug it off, as if you don't ever believe in enforcing or imposing your morals. Again: what abut child molesting?

Sara - Still no response to my main argument? Oh well, can' say I'm surprised. That's always what people do when they don't have a sufficient argument of their own: they just come up with stupid excuses for why they won't get into the debate. You're excuse is "well I'm trying to impose my morals and that's wrong," which ironically is your own moral as well. You are morally opposed to people imposing their morals on others. And yet you use that as a reason not to debate this subject, when you seem to feel so strongly.

Morals are not absolutel, in that obviously nobody know's all right and wrong, but true right and wrong are absolute, and instead of comign up with stupid, wishy-washy, meaningless statements about "moral relativity," why don't we focus instead on trying to figure out what really is right and wrong?

And yes, all morals are universal, or else they would not be wrong. It's not okay for some cultures to rape children, and it's not okay for some cultures have slavery; how is this any different? Again, it's not an opinion, nor is it just some neutral action that doesn't have a right or wrong. Morals, by their very nature, are universal; and right and wrong, by their very nature, are always absolute.

: Boo Jul 18 2005, 07:23 PM

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 15 2005, 06:33 AM)
that's reall kind of you thanks sara. i certainly approciate your accute judment of me. im too selfish to give you mine judgement of you.
[right][snapback]182862[/snapback][/right]

watch out this could be locked ohmy.gif

I for one.

Enjoy porn.
and I will not elaborate any further wink.gif

: Sara Jul 22 2005, 08:17 PM

QUOTE(Boo @ Jul 19 2005, 03:23 PM)
QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 15 2005, 06:33 AM)
that's reall kind of you thanks sara. i certainly approciate your accute judment of me. im too selfish to give you mine judgement of you.
[right][snapback]182862[/snapback][/right]

watch out this could be locked ohmy.gif

[right][snapback]183377[/snapback][/right]


oh i just saw that! dont worry, it wont get locked. only stupid topics get locked. smile.gif

: defiance Jul 22 2005, 09:49 PM

Might as well be locked anyway, since you refuse to reply. What kind of discussion is that?

: Boo Jul 22 2005, 10:24 PM

see next post honey pie wink.gif

: Boo Jul 22 2005, 10:28 PM

ooh "stupid" topics
partial much?


we won't take the piss out of your boyfriend anymore if it hurts you that much...

or was it the fact that you could not respond to YOUR own post

which YOU happened to have the LAST word in THEN CLOSED to YOUR OWN convienance?

i mean who is stupid now?

i mean don't play yourself like that

atleast have the ovaries to wait for a response from the original poster

: defiance Jul 22 2005, 10:33 PM

QUOTE(Boo @ Jul 23 2005, 01:24 AM)
see next post honey pie wink.gif
[right][snapback]183851[/snapback][/right]

I was talking to Sara.

: Boo Jul 22 2005, 10:35 PM

and so was i wink.gif

: Boo Jul 22 2005, 10:37 PM

sorry i just skpped right over you

: defiance Jul 22 2005, 10:52 PM

Oh, my mistake then. Whatever, lol.

Sara, are you actually going to respond because you don't like the way I'm presenting myself; cause you think I'm being too "morally self-righteous" or whatever? Whatever.

: Lostphoenix Jul 23 2005, 01:01 AM

well, seems like you get called fuckface with whitetrash romance and people with such behaviour get the apology, i think a person like that can't respond to you defiance if you present yourself as a moral person. probably checking cosmopolitan for an opinion heh

: Sara Jul 23 2005, 01:11 AM

oh no, i've upsetted the nerdbags, and they've unleashed their very own cyber insults! ohno.gif


chill guys. the topic is not going to get locked. if ur finding it very hard to deal with that, don't reply. like i said, only stupid topics get locked.

: Lostphoenix Jul 23 2005, 01:27 AM

well, thanks god you don't moderate politics or front page! grin.gif

so are you gonna answer defiance or just gonna patronize him on bases of his age (as if you were BY decades older then him)?

: Sara Jul 23 2005, 01:35 AM

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Jul 23 2005, 09:27 PM)
well, thanks god you don't moderate politics or front page!  grin.gif 

[right][snapback]183875[/snapback][/right]


knowing how much rubbish u post in politick and front page, i thank god too i dont mod either of them. grin.gif

: Lostphoenix Jul 23 2005, 01:48 AM

well, thanks god for that, its actualy compliment coming from you.

: Sara Jul 23 2005, 01:51 AM

oh no it wasn't a compliment. but if rubbish is what u aim for then great. smile2.gif

and oh, before u come with another lame comeback, u win. u aced the porn thread, go u! ur a real winner! Crylol.gif

: Lostphoenix Jul 23 2005, 02:35 AM

well, you didnt even understood what i meant, dear, what you don't understand you call stupid topic or rubbish, so it is a compliment. wink.gif since the nerdbags get what i say and you don't heh wink.gif


but before you really make a clause for yourself to close this topic, you better do answer defiance's post or you'll be a hypocrit, now you'd not want that, especially after preaching to defiance he's putting out his views as superior to others and then you patronize him....

: Sara Jul 23 2005, 03:14 AM

my bad. i shouldn't have said nerdbags.

: yabasta Jul 23 2005, 05:03 AM

Not unless you wanted to sound like a fool.

: Grimer 54 Jul 23 2005, 05:34 AM

Man, I can't wait to use nerdbag, that's an awesome fucking word. =) My personal favorite insult of all time though, is calling someone a 'dirty sandbox' though, it's somewhat insurmountable.

So, now that we are done arguing about arguing, lets talk about porno! I think that our rights allow us to do whatever we want, pornography included. Obviously, it can only involve people of consenting age, (which our society has determined to be 18) and, it should only be viewed by people who want to view it: People should not be forced to be subjegated to sexual depiction without their consent. I don't want anyone's moral code instilled upon me, but, at the same time, I shouldn't have to disregard my own moral code for someone else. I think that's what it's all about.

: Sara Jul 23 2005, 05:43 AM

QUOTE(Grimer 54 @ Jul 24 2005, 01:34 AM)
So, now that we are done arguing about arguing, lets talk about porno! I think that our rights allow us to do whatever we want, pornography included. Obviously, it can only involve people of consenting age, (which our society has determined to be 18) and, it should only be viewed by people who want to view it: People should not be forced to be subjegated to sexual depiction without their consent. I don't want anyone's moral code instilled upon me, but, at the same time, I shouldn't have to disregard my own moral code for someone else. I think that's what it's all about.
[right][snapback]183930[/snapback][/right]


i think u summed it up nicely there grimer. it took me pages to just say that laugh.gif


edit: thanks for bringing the discussion back on topic.

: defiance Jul 25 2005, 09:42 PM

QUOTE(Grimer 54 @ Jul 23 2005, 08:34 AM)
So, now that we are done arguing about arguing, lets talk about porno! I think that our rights allow us to do whatever we want, pornography included.


Hmm, interesting. I guess that's why we have laws....

QUOTE
Obviously, it can only involve people of consenting age, (which our society has determined to be 18)


Sound like forcing your morals on others? Hmm....

QUOTE
I don't want anyone's moral code instilled upon me, but, at the same time, I shouldn't have to disregard my own moral code for someone else. I think that's what it's all about.
[right][snapback]183930[/snapback][/right]

Yeah, right....

If you don't believe in ever forcing your morals on others, why do you advocate age-based restrictions on pornogaphy-viewing? Do you have non-moral basis for this? The fact is, some morals must be upheld by the law, because they are not just personal values but deeply important social issues. The question is just which mroals are and not those, and what is the basis of those morals. For me, I see no major difference between the sex industry and other variations of wage-slavery, except that in this case the term is much more literal. And that to me is wrong. Selling your body (literally) to the sex industry (which includes both pornography and prostitution) so you can earn some money is like selling your very value as a human being; and buying it is even worse. It is a devaluement of others, whatever gender they may be. So to me it is not a feminist issue but a humanist issue. That's how I view it anyway.

Sara, please show some actual thought for once, and not just acceptance of soem magazine or political platform or whatever it s you base your beliefs on. You have consistently refused to reply to my post, and finally your only comment was an agreement with Grimer, who at least had the backbone to defend his views and present his own argument, instead of resorting to lame insults in order to avoid replying. Perhaps the reason you can't respond yourself is because the views you are presenting are not really your conclusions but somethign that you read and decided you agreed with. You lack original thought, it seems like to me.

: Holter Jul 25 2005, 10:49 PM

QUOTE
Holter - of course I am arguing morals, that's what almost all of my debates here are about. Morals are our beliefs about right and wrong. So if I think it's wrong for someone to sell their body for money, that's my belief, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with me persuadign others to believe in it also.


No your absolutely right, there is nothing wrong with attempting to get other people to see things the way you do, but when you continually ignore other peoples valid points, or posts meanings in general, or when you take a condescending tone against people who feel differently than you, what are we supposed to do? Im not going to sit here and debate with someone who is so seemingly full of himself that he will not even adress the points in my posts. Its really that simple. And then you demand reponses to your arguments, why should i waste my time adressing your points, when you wont take the time to address my questions on your views specifically about how you see the entire porn industry as wage-slavery, or how you are taking the extreme cases and arguing them as if they are the majority of a situation. Thats like me coming into a political thread saying fuck all commies, all they are are war mongers. You wouldnt take that seriously, so why should i take your comments directly towards some 14 year old being forced to have sex for money on camera seriously? I certainly dont see the point. But hey, i guess thats what people do when they dont have a sufficient argument to substantiate their moral claim on an issue, when its pretty clear that your stance is just to be against it, so my stance will just be to say people should be allowed to work in the porn industry if they see fit. Being "against it" is too much of an invasion of a persons individual rights of expression. You dont have to have any involvement with the porn industry in your life, just like i dont have to have any involvement with the fantastical economies and governmental systems people talk about on here.

A comment like this

QUOTE
To tell the truth, the fact that you claim first to have morals and then that your morals are only "opinion" is the real joke to me


is a perfect example of why i cant debate this with you. Morals are opinions because they are a choice that is logical to you. And to say "is a real joke to me" is really very patronizing.

QUOTE
Now it may be somewhat crossing the line of the law itnerferign in personal activities, but I really don't care. The issue to me is that it massively contributes to this sickenign system, even if it is underground.


This really would have been the most shocking comment of all.

: defiance Jul 25 2005, 11:28 PM

QUOTE(Holter @ Jul 26 2005, 01:49 AM)
No your absolutely right, there is nothing wrong with attempting to get other people to see things the way you do, but when you continually ignore other peoples valid points, or posts meanings in general, or when you take a condescending tone against people who feel differently than you, what are we supposed to do? Im not going to sit here and debate with someone who is so seemingly full of himself that he will not even adress the points in my posts.  Its really that simple.


Could you pelase elaborate a little? I don't rememebr ever being condescending or ignoring anyone. I've addressed all the questioned you just referred to, especially regarding it's relation to wage-slavery. And I did not just take soem extreme case, I adressed the whole issue in general. Selling your body to sex industry for money is dehumanizing and definately very characteristic of classical wage-slavery. That includes "softcore" pornography.

Just to calrify, that's my conviction, just so you don't get confused and think I'm being condescending to you. From now on I'll always make sure to say "I believe" before saying anything.

QUOTE
why should i take your comments directly towards some 14 year old being forced to have sex for money on camera seriously?  I certainly dont see the point.

No, you obviously don't. You said we should not force our morals on anyone, so I asked if it is wrong to force our morals on others when it comes to child sex. All of us agree and strongly believe that children's sexual viewing and atcivity should be completely restricted, and the basis for that is our moral convictions. So, I'm saying it seems hypcritical of you to say it's wrogn to force my morals on others no matter what and then support doing so in a case such as child sex. Now do you see my point?

QUOTE
Being "against it" is too much of an invasion of a persons individual rights of expression.


nce again, you could say the exact same thing about child sex.

QUOTE
A comment like this

QUOTE
To tell the truth, the fact that you claim first to have morals and then that your morals are only "opinion" is the real joke to me


is a perfect example of why i cant debate this with you. Morals are opinions because they are a choice that is logical to you.


Wrong... morals are deeply held convictions about right and wrong; opinions are relative and easily-changeable thoughts about any given subject. For instance, it is my opinion that RATM has/had really awesome-sounding music. However, it is my deeply-held moral conviction that it is wrong to rape or murder. Please don't tell me you can't see the difference there.

QUOTE
And to say "is a real joke to me" is really very patronizing.


Sara was the one who originally said it; I jwas just following her shining moral example.

QUOTE
QUOTE
Now it may be somewhat crossing the line of the law itnerferign in personal activities, but I really don't care. The issue to me is that it massively contributes to this sickenign system, even if it is underground.


This really would have been the most shocking comment of all.
[right][snapback]184150[/snapback][/right]

Why is that? You don't seem to think so when it comes to certain issues.

I just saw somethign though, which I think helps me understand why you say I ignored your post. You and I had posted at the same exact time, so I didn't see your post thus I didn't respond to it. If you want I can go back and reply to it. In fact I'll do that right now.

: defiance Jul 26 2005, 12:21 AM

Here, I'm replyign to your that I didn't notice before. I hope that makes you happy. I apologize for not seeign it, otherwise I would've replied. Some of these points I adressed in my last post, but htis so you can just repond to htis one if you want.

QUOTE(Holter @ Jul 16 2005, 01:51 AM)
QUOTE(defiance @ Jul 15 2005, 02:02 PM)
What about a fourteen-year-old?


Why do you always have to resort to arguing about the extreme and of the spectrum when you are debating? Its like, if someone brings up a good point about capitalism, like i have in the past - the first thing i have to hear about is slave labor in a third world country. OF COURSE ITS A BAD THING, but its not everything. And you relating the ENTIRE PORN INDUSTRY to some guy who likes to shoot "midget 14 year old rape porn" - how the fuck is someone supposed to take an argument seriously with someone else when they insiston taking the extreme as their focus? I personally wont even respond to that, not because i dont know what to say, or something like that - but for the simple fact that arguing about the extreme points is basically ludicrous.


You misunderstood the point of my example. If a fourteen-year-old and an adult both consented to have sex, would it be alright in your opinion? Because accordign to you the law should never, ever, in any case whatsoever, interefere with the personal choices of individuals, so long as it is done freely and mutually by all parties involved. That is the premise you are going by. So, does that premise still stand in the case of children or young teenagers who are consenting? I guarantee there are plenty of fourteen-year-olds who would be quite happy at such a chance.

QUOTE
QUOTE
I mentioned it because you and Hotler were saying that there is no difference between making out and having sex. If that is the case, I ask, would you be fine with people having sex in public? Or are you completely against anyone ever kissing in public? My point is that there is a clear difference between kissing and sex.


Well when I mentioned the kissing equivilence to sex, it was in return to your comment or someone elses comment about sexual intimacy, and how it is something that shouldnt be done - and i was pointing out to you that for a lot of people, kissing is a more intimate thing than having sex is - but you took it an ran with the OMGBUT WHUT ABOUT SEX IN TEH PARK IN PUBLIC nonsense. Its not about the physical difference between the two.


Actually, that is precisely what it's about. Intimacy is of course very improtant, and from my personal moral viewpoint sex should be something between two loving people and not just with anyone. However, that is not the only think or the main thing being discussed now. The original statement made by someone (might've been me) was something to the effect of "would you be okay with your girlfriend/spouse/partner sleeping around with other people in ordinary life; and if not why is it okay for a job?" That of course was implying the question of intimacy, but it also has a physical application as well -- and for that matter, so does the intimacy part itself have. So you then asked, very rightly, why it is then okay to kiss on the job, seeing that is also an intimate act. My response was that there is also a very big physical difference, not just intimacy. I was in other words conceding your point about intimacy but at the same time bringing up the other point, which I feel is much stronger.

QUOTE
QUOTE
Well no kidding! Of course I wil lthink mine superior, THEY'RE MY MORALS! Do you know what morals are? They are a person's beliefs abotu what is right and what is wrong. Obviously I will think mine superior if I believe somethign is wrogn and you have no problem with it, just as you would naturally feel the same way towards mine. Unless you don't even have morals, in which case I would say you are blissfully ignorant. But I think i can safely say that is not the case, since you believe things such as child-pornography or child-sex are wrong (which I agree with). So don't tell me I need to stop thinking my mroals are superior, and start showing how they are not.


Wow, this is a whole new side to defiance. Now we have the fascist moral highground defiance. If you dont believe in your own morals, then they are not your own...but to completely toss aside someone elses morals, or believe that yours are the end all to all beliefs is one step into a fascist world. I think we are all very opinionated on this site, but I also thought that this was a place to learn something - not to stand with a fist in the air, and your ego in the other. You need to stop thinking your morals are superior, and start thinking that your morals are your morals, and ours are ours.


See, I've never really bought this whole moral relativity thing. For that matter, that in itself is a moral ("live-and-let-live"). And I agree with it to an extent, in that I believe people should be free to determine their own lives; but I also believe we must be responsible and have respect for others' and for our own value. Should we not have laws protecting the environment, then? We have to be responsable. Otherwise, like Lostphoenix said, our freedom is just child's play. You talk about adults bieng able to choose for themselves, and I say it is precisely because they are full-grown, supposedly mature adults, that they must be even more responsable. People who have no sense of responsability are people who are incapable of having true freedom, because in the end they just destroy themselves, either literally or characteristically.

And as for morals; yes, mine are my own, and soem of them may be wrong, but the goal is to try to be as right as possible. Two completely opposing morals can not be equal, because morals, by their very nature, tend to consist of a right and a wrong; thus if one moral is right, it's opposite, naturally, is wrong. Therefore, our opposing morals can not both be equal. Either I'm right or you are. Obviously I subscribe to the former, and you subscribe to the latter. The purpose of this debate is to challenge each others views and see if one can convince the other. Do you get what I'm saying now?

QUOTE
QUOTE
And thanks for compeltely ignoring my main point, which is that both pornography and prostitution are the worst forms of wage-slavery, because you are literally sellign your body for money. And since you claim to be against wage-slavery, it seems extremely hypocritical to then saay not just that you believe it should be legal (which I could possibly understand from certain views), but indeed that you actually think it's perfectly fine. I udnerstand that not all of our morals can be made into law, and that one could make that argument with porgnography -- but to say that even from your own personal moral perspective there is nothing wrong with pornography, is, well, like I alread said, extremely hypocritical from someone who is against wage-slavery.


I dont see how this makes any sense though - your saying that its wage-slavery because they are selling your body for money - but by that logic every job is a form of wage-slavery. What about the guy who works for a moving van lines, who each day subjects his body to physical harm by lifting couches, walking up and down stairs with file cabinets. I mean, all he really is is a body to move things, and people are paying him to use that body to do stuff. You could really insert anything into that metaphor - so really i dont think that that argument holds any water. You just seem to believe that a persons intimate relations should be a private matter - and if someone has no problem with freely expressing themselves in a sexual manner is wrong. And now you are trying to justify it with calling pornography slave labor (while every porn star ive run into is fucking wealthy, and happy - male and female) and exploitation - completely ignoring the fact that what you do for a living is your choice, not someone elses. I disagree in principal to that.


I can kind of see what you mean here. Perhaps wage-slavery is not the correct word for it. It's like... it dehumanizes us. It takes an act of deep, mutual physical and emotional intimacy, and it turn the person involved into a mere item or product. So it takes away any element of character or personal value, when the act is one that should imply otherwise. And that's what I mean about dehumanization.

And these other jobs are in many cases, at present, very dehumanizing. That's the problem with capitalism, you see: it turns workers into mere products for the sake of profit. However, there is a big difference also in that most of those jobs are ones of collective necessity, jobs that have to be done (or at least, in the current state of society anyway), whose benefits come not in the work itself but in the long-term results. If those results do not benefit the workers, then I consider it exploitation. If, however, the material benefits do include the workers, then it is a fair labor.

QUOTE
QUOTE
If you have problem with debating with me simply because I believe in right and wrong and you supposedly don't, then that's your own problem and I frankly don't care. If you really believe that right and wrong are just relative and everything is a matter of personal opinion, than I'd say you are delusional. This is a debate about whether or not pornography and prostitution are wrong, and why that is. If you don't believe in morals, what are you doing on a debate about them?
[right][snapback]182905[/snapback][/right]


This is downright laughable.
[right][snapback]182996[/snapback][/right]


What's that? Are you tyrign to patronize me? That's what you accused me of when I said Sara's moral relativity comment was a joke. Now you say the same thing basically. Not that I care, I just think it's hypocritical of you, though it is a rather common hypocrisy. And what is so laughable about it anyway?

I hope my answers satisfied you.

: Holter Jul 26 2005, 01:05 PM

QUOTE
You misunderstood the point of my example. If a fourteen-year-old and an adult both consented to have sex, would it be alright in your opinion? Because accordign to you the law should never, ever, in any case whatsoever, interefere with the personal choices of individuals, so long as it is done freely and mutually by all parties involved. That is the premise you are going by. So, does that premise still stand in the case of children or young teenagers who are consenting? I guarantee there are plenty of fourteen-year-olds who would be quite happy at such a chance.


No it would not be alright, because it is against the law in my country. I also have a moral objection to people that have sex while under the age of 18, but I am really trying to veer this conversation away from what i believe to be a small factor in the sex industry. It is gross to me that there are movies made called Teen this, or barely legal that market specifically towards people who like younger partners - but I believe that those people are of age. Plus i dont remember saying that the law should never ever interfere with the personal choices of the individual, so if I did then that was clearly a mistake. I do however hope that society can stay out of our personal lives as much as possible, but laws are specifically set in place to help govern society.

Thats sort of the rub that you and i have here defiance, because i think you and i see little difference between what a moral is and what a law is. What is a law other than a rule of society that is set in place or voted on by citizens, whose on votes are predicated on their beliefs and morals. I mean, like you said, thats what you argue in here with the mojority of the time, your morals - which to you if set in place would be the perfect law of the land, same with mine (in my own head i suppose) - but im still willing to learn, I mean thats what I want most. The last thing i want to end up doing is to come here just to argue for the sake of arguing. It is just my belief that sex as an act should be something that the government has no say in, other than age limits and forcible situations. I do not think that sex with minors should be something that our society brushes off, and thats why we have laws against sex with minors, which is EXACTLY why people who engage in this for the adult film industry should be tried and convicted of lewd activities. But the actions of a small percentage ofthe industry, so in my belief the entire industry should not be eradicated because of the mistakes of a few. That kind of thinking, labeling the entire industry as its worst individuals or with your own opinions about the industry, is really no different than racial profiling - something that happens all the time, and is continually escalating in its acceptance in society against the muslim community since 9/11.

I do hold strong to my morals, but if I were to hold strong to them even after learning something that could affect that stance, then i think i personally have problems. But seeing as you and i keep disagreeing about this definition, i dont want to talk about that anymore.

QUOTE
Actually, that is precisely what it's about. Intimacy is of course very improtant, and from my personal moral viewpoint sex should be something between two loving people and not just with anyone. However, that is not the only think or the main thing being discussed now. The original statement made by someone (might've been me) was something to the effect of "would you be okay with your girlfriend/spouse/partner sleeping around with other people in ordinary life; and if not why is it okay for a job?" That of course was implying the question of intimacy, but it also has a physical application as well -- and for that matter, so does the intimacy part itself have. So you then asked, very rightly, why it is then okay to kiss on the job, seeing that is also an intimate act. My response was that there is also a very big physical difference, not just intimacy. I was in other words conceding your point about intimacy but at the same time bringing up the other point, which I feel is much stronger.


In general i agree with your viewpoint that sex should be something between two loving people, but again i wouldnt want to inflict my view on that onto society, because i know sooo many people who feel differently about that, and i wouldnt want to impose my belief on them.

Also, why do you think it is that most prostitutes will not kiss their clients, but will have sex with them?

QUOTE
See, I've never really bought this whole moral relativity thing. For that matter, that in itself is a moral ("live-and-let-live"). And I agree with it to an extent, in that I believe people should be free to determine their own lives; but I also believe we must be responsible and have respect for others' and for our own value. Should we not have laws protecting the environment, then? We have to be responsable. Otherwise, like Lostphoenix said, our freedom is just child's play. You talk about adults bieng able to choose for themselves, and I say it is precisely because they are full-grown, supposedly mature adults, that they must be even more responsable. People who have no sense of responsability are people who are incapable of having true freedom, because in the end they just destroy themselves, either literally or characteristically.


OK, this confuses me a bit - im not sure if you are trying to say that people who choose to be in the adult film industry have no sense of responsibility, or if we have leapt into a discussion about the adult population and its own personal responsibilities? Of course we need to have laws to protect the environment...Where is this going...so i can respond. I never said we should have no laws, i mean if i did, then even i would think im a moron for saying that, because that is something that i couldnt disagree with more.

QUOTE
And as for morals; yes, mine are my own, and soem of them may be wrong, but the goal is to try to be as right as possible. Two completely opposing morals can not be equal, because morals, by their very nature, tend to consist of a right and a wrong; thus if one moral is right, it's opposite, naturally, is wrong. Therefore, our opposing morals can not both be equal. Either I'm right or you are. Obviously I subscribe to the former, and you subscribe to the latter.


Ok, see I totally disagree, and i think you do too based on what youve said in the past. How can one persons moral be right, and the other be wrong? Thats ridiculous man. The only way that another persons moral can be wrong is if its the opposite of yours, in which this all becomes a matter of personal opnions, which you seem to think are completely irrelevant to morals. Plus, now you say "some of them may be wrong, but the goal is to try to be as right as possible" - that doesnt sound like the same person who said that his morals are in a sense infallible to himself.

QUOTE
The purpose of this debate is to challenge each others views and see if one can convince the other. Do you get what I'm saying now?


This is exactly what i have been saying defiance! I said debates are a place to learn.

QUOTE
I can kind of see what you mean here. Perhaps wage-slavery is not the correct word for it. It's like... it dehumanizes us. It takes an act of deep, mutual physical and emotional intimacy, and it turn the person involved into a mere item or product. So it takes away any element of character or personal value, when the act is one that should imply otherwise.  And that's what I mean about dehumanization.


Thats true, pornography makes objects of humans, but really its no different than basically any other job, so i still think its your objection to the "emotional intimacy" of sex, not the dehumanizing nature of the job. Professional athletes and celebrities are the same thing, they are just objects to us, and we exploit their lives as much as possible. Same with my exapmle of someone who works for a moving van lines, they are just another body. But people dont choose jobs as a career that have no chance for ascention. I truely believe that this job we are discussing is a choice for the majority of its employers, and just because i personally wouldnt have a one night stand, or sex without a relationship doesnt mean that i think that people shouldnt be allowed to do this as a profession - hell if its their choice and its really not hurting anybody, then i say go for it. I dont have to watch it.

QUOTE
What's that? Are you tyrign to patronize me? That's what you accused me of when I said Sara's moral relativity comment was a joke. Now you say the same thing basically. Not that I care, I just think it's hypocritical of you, though it is a rather common hypocrisy. And what is so laughable about it anyway?

I hope my answers satisfied you.


That is definitely me trying to patronize you, and ill take it back because it is the exact thing that i have a problem with. it is hard to hold back with comments like

QUOTE
If you have problem with debating with me simply because I believe in right and wrong and you supposedly don't, then that's your own problem and I frankly don't care.


Thats a blatant personal attack from you to me, claiming for some reason that i dont believe in right and wrong, and continuing on to say well hey thats your issue, so i dont give a fuck. How condescending is that? The first time that i took a shot at you was when you said that you couldnt respect my opinion - thats talking down to me and makes me believe that debating with someone who thinks that way about other people is a waste of time because a, i dont want to learn anything from someone who thinks that way about other people, and b, all of my posts will be writing in futility because its pretty evident that any of my points that i lay out, or rebuttals that i type will be pushed aside by you because you cant respect me or my opinions. But I will not take a shot or be patronizing again in this thread as long as you extend the same common courtesy to me and anyone else who decided to join this debate in the future. It belittles both of our posts.

All of this crap above, this entire post and your entire post, and probably this entire fucking thread boils down to two sides, people who think that two people having sex should be between two consenting loving individuals and this act as a job should be prohibited by the government, and the side that believes that sex is an intimate relationship, but if people choose to do this as a living should be allowed to as long as it doesnt hurt anybody.

Now if theres any post that I didnt respond to, or someone else didnt respond to you can point it out to me and i will gladly respond to it seeing as you took the time to backtrack and answer my post, and did it without condescention.

: Mars Jul 26 2005, 09:00 PM

I'm not planning to get into arguing about arguing here, but just wanted to say what I think of all this. No one will, I hope, take issue if I don't reply since I'm just not really able to do a lot of posting right now. Thanks.

Today a co-worker said she heard a 30-yr old new neighbor say another neighbor's 15-yr old daughter was hot, and that he wanted to "work her out" and several other similar expressions. He was actually on his way to the girl's house to ask her father if he minded! My friend told him he'd probably get shot in the head if he tried. This story doesn't make me want to say "Live and Let Live." It makes me want to protect girls from these sickos who seek to harm them, even though some of the girls ARE actually flattered by the behavior.

None of this is unusual these days, especially in poor communities. Kids, teens and non-employed adults are too often watching soft porn in the form of R+B videos and Gansta rap videos. Annd this is not even getting into true porn, which now is as common as finding a used condom on the curb as you step out of your car. Porn doesn't CAUSE the problems but it is part of the cycle that keeps going and going.

Some people's first reaction is that they all have a RIGHT to see this crap, and that the industry and artists have the RIGHT to make it. And as for the sex industry, some feel that women can CHOOSE to be treated like a nothing more than a fleshy repository for male cum, and to be filmed while doing it. (Oh, what a priviledge that is.)

Well, in America, you are correct: they do have those rights. So does Nike have the RIGHT to employ 6-year olds to increase their profit.

Sometimes we fight against things that aren't even supposed to happen because they are illegal. Sometimes we fight against things that may BE legal, but we believe they are harmful and exploitative. Sometimes the people we feel are being exploited don't want us to fight against the system we see as their enemy. I'm not going to throw stones at them for not agreeing with me. But I believe:

1. Being against something doesn't mean you want it to be ILLEGAL. I don't believe in fighting mainly within the system for change, because the system I live in is corrupt to the core. Since porn and prostitution are so bound up in the social inequalities between men and women, including the money trail, they are a huge (and wildly growing, thanks to the internet) part of current culture. Thus I feel it would be futile ANYWAY to simply illegalize them. Instead I hope to change peoples' minds about wanting and demanding this stuff in the first place.

2. Some principles of justice are just more important in the scheme of things than freedom of speech. When I hear the KKK is coming to march somewhere, my first thoughts are "They are hoping to increase their racist influence on sections of the public" -- the issue of "They have the right to say what they want" is a pretty secondary issue. I don't spend my energy trying to argue they don't have a legal right to march -- my issue with them is not about their marching! It is about their central role in advocating and organizing racist violence towards people of color (as well as their other supremacist attitudes and activities.)

A while back at a Klan rally downtown here in Chicago, a bunch of protestors were busted (as they were LEAVING the event..) and one KKKer also. In court, they tried to try all of them as a group, INCLUDING THE Klansman! Our side moved to separate. The court/system wanted to make us some kind of Equal Sides Each Getting Disorderly While Exercising Their Right To Free Speech. Ridiculous! One side stands for building a movement to discriminate, defame, assault annd destroy sections of the people. The other side stands for PROTECTING the rights of all people to live without oppression. And if Oppressors are FREE to oppress, the people will not be FREE to live without oppression.


: Grimer 54 Jul 29 2005, 11:45 AM


QUOTE
If you don't believe in ever forcing your morals on others, why do you advocate age-based restrictions on pornogaphy-viewing?


What? I didn't say that... I said you have to be eighteen to consent to participating in pornography. Really, it should be the parent's decision on children's access to pornography... The reason I say this, is because children can be exploited far easier then adults, and our society has decided that eighteen is the line where most individuals have reached the level of maturity necesarry to mak etheir own decisions on the matter. There will always be some level of moral code instilled in a society... it's one of the reasons government is inevitable. We value a moral code that gives us the freedom to have our own moral code as well, within parameter- Murder, for instance, is not acceptable in any American's moral code, because it's against the law. The law should outlaw the extremes, and society should determine the extremes, this is how civilization continues.

QUOTE
Do you have non-moral basis for this? The fact is, some morals must be upheld by the law, because they are not just personal values but deeply important social issues. The question is just which mroals are and not those, and what is the basis of those morals. For me, I see no major difference between the sex industry and other variations of wage-slavery, except that in this case the term is much more literal. And that to me is wrong. Selling your body (literally) to the sex industry (which includes both pornography and prostitution) so you can earn some money is like selling your very value as a human being; and buying it is even worse. It is a devaluement of others, whatever gender they may be. So to me it is not a feminist issue but a humanist issue. That's how I view it anyway.


Pornography and prostitution are two radically different things, dude. Pornography is not slavery in any way shape or form. Freedom means the freedom to have any morals you want, or perhaps any lack of morals you want. We have laws to protect the morals held by the majority in a society; Thus, again, 'Do Not Kill' is law. Prostitution is a whole nother beast.

I don't think you can accuse me of being the moralist on this issue. Obviously nothing is devoid of morals, because a line will be drawn somewhere. I believe the line should be drawn democratically, and it should allow for libertarian practice, where ones freedom is absolute upon themselves, but must be halted when it encroaches upon others. NO ONE HERE is justifying any sort of slavery, only the individual's freedom to practice what they want, and the individual's freedom to view what they want. I believe the two can coexist, and should.

If I want to have sex with some, and they want to have sex with me, and we want to video tape it, and we want to sell it, then you should be free to buy it or not buy it. Society determines what is acceptable for the public to be subjected to, and what the indivudal must decide to subject themselves to. Porn is an individual's decision all the way through, and should remain such, in the name of freedom.

: Mars Aug 5 2005, 08:02 PM

QUOTE(Grimer 54 @ Jul 29 2005, 02:45 PM)
The law should outlaw the extremes, and society should determine the extremes, this is how civilization continues.

wacko.gif Civilization is based on the sanctity of... the middle ground?


QUOTE
If I want to have sex with some, and they want to have sex with me, and we want to video tape it, and we want to sell it, then you should be free to buy it or not buy it. Society determines what is acceptable for the public to be subjected to, and what the indivudal must decide to subject themselves to. Porn is an individual's decision all the way through, and should remain such, in the name of freedom.

Yes, I remember learning in school how those Pilgrams left all they knew behind for a chance at a better life where they could be porn stars and mindless consumers of materials for masturbation. I believe this lofty freedom is in the Declaration of Independence...

: Sara Aug 6 2005, 03:02 PM

QUOTE(Mars @ Aug 6 2005, 04:02 PM)
Yes, I remember learning in school how those Pilgrams left all they knew behind for a chance at a better life where they could be porn stars and mindless consumers of materials for masturbation.  I believe this lofty freedom is in the Declaration of Independence...
[right][snapback]185286[/snapback][/right]


do u think that the right to one's sexuality is not a worthy cause?

: Lostphoenix Aug 6 2005, 11:23 PM

QUOTE(Mars @ Aug 6 2005, 04:02 PM)
Yes, I remember learning in school how those Pilgrams left all they knew behind for a chance at a better life where they could be porn stars and mindless consumers of materials for masturbation. I believe this lofty freedom is in the Declaration of Independence...




sara:

do u think that the right to one's sexuality is not a worthy cause?


i don't think mars is mistaking porn with sexuality. . . is porn your sexuality sara?

: Rage Head Aug 9 2005, 04:34 PM

Umm, okay, I'm kind of stepping in here, but my view on pornography is it's stupid. I mean, I've noticed how television has made it normal and that girlfriends should be okay with their boyfriends looking at pornography for whatever reasons. I think that's stupid, I had a pornography problem for about a year, and then I stopped. I'm not saying this just because I'm a christian, because it's human nature to be attracted to the opposite gender and wanna see some tits. However, I think it really ruins sex in some ways, because you'll start imagining someone else, and I think that's wrong, and you shouldn't be with that person until you love that person, and want to be with that person, and only have sex with that person. I'm sorry if I sound conservative, but I don't think it's really okay to look at pornography because it's really cheating if you ask me, because in the end you'll imagine having sex with someone else when you're having sex with someone. However, of course everyones minds wonder and you imagine sex anyways, but to ruin the bondship that sex creates, I don't think should be ruined by pornography. I'm single, I have been for two or three years, can't remember. I just want sex to be something special, it doesn't have to be with only one person, but something where I don't think of someone else and neither does she. Sorry if you disagree.

: Mars Aug 10 2005, 09:09 PM

QUOTE(Sara @ Aug 6 2005, 06:02 PM)
QUOTE(Mars @ Aug 6 2005, 04:02 PM)
Yes, I remember learning in school how those Pilgrams left all they knew behind for a chance at a better life where they could be porn stars and mindless consumers of materials for masturbation.  I believe this lofty freedom is in the Declaration of Independence...
[right][snapback]185286[/snapback][/right]


do u think that the right to one's sexuality is not a worthy cause?
[right][snapback]185332[/snapback][/right]



Again, I'm not debating whether people should have the RIGHT to look at porn. Sure, you and Grimer and anybody else can feel legally entitled to do so. MY point is rather that the bigger issue here is the NATURE of porn -- and no amount of hiding behind the flag (Sara, if you aren't in the u.s. excuse my phrasing, because that phrase has a history etc here) will eliminate the core of this issue.

So often (again, in the u.s. particularly) people uphold the most ugly oppressive stuff (which is why I brought up the KKK earlier) by waving around the "This is a free country and we have the right to do this!" line. And yes it is true. But I think it is ridiculous for anyone to suggest that having the right to do something makes it some great thing that must be defended "In the name of freedom"! laughing.gif The future of civil liberties, human rights, and world peace depends on defending the right to PORN? wacko.gif laugh.gif

Is this really the kind of "freedom" people want to brag about, wanna wax about with the grandchildren by the fireside, wanna shout about with your fist in the air with your last dieing breath? Porn? "In the name of freedom"?

The world is not headed in a particularly lovely direction these days, if one hasn't noticed. Frankly, anyone who spends a lot of energy defending their right to buy sexually-explicit materials is obviously concerned less with the oppression and suffering of others, and more with their own selfish pleasures.

: Holter Aug 12 2005, 02:36 AM

hey lostphoenix im downloading porn right now w00t.gif

: Lostphoenix Aug 12 2005, 02:51 AM

i enjoy more making love, then watchin people fuck wink.gif

: Holter Aug 12 2005, 03:38 AM

So do I. Doesnt mean i shouldnt be able to watch porn from time to time if I feel like it. wavenew.gif

: Lostphoenix Aug 12 2005, 03:46 AM

i'm not your authority to tell you not to, all i do is express is my opinion that the way the porn industry of today isn't an ethic business and while i for example may enjoy eating chicken or fish i don't because it doesn't ethically ring my bells to do so, so i don't. but that's my choice and what you choose is your business and matter for your conscience not mine.

: Holter Aug 12 2005, 12:26 PM

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Aug 12 2005, 04:46 AM)
matter for your conscience not mine.
[right][snapback]185742[/snapback][/right]


hahaha. I can assure you, my conscience is fine. I think you should be more concerned with the way you speak to people, instead of the food you choose to or not to eat.

: Lostphoenix Aug 12 2005, 01:52 PM

if i add a measure of all your snide remarks, my communications style will sure improve.

and i don't think your post discusses the topic at hand so either pm me if you have matters to discuss that are off topic since the topic of matter is not me, but what the title suggests or comment on topic at hand.

: Grimer 54 Aug 12 2005, 03:48 PM

Alright, personal views on porn aside, do you think it should be regulated by the government?

People should be allowed to video tape themselves having sex, and sell it. If there's someone out there to buy it, then whats the problem? Everyone involved benefits, everyone not involved is left out of it. The government shouldn't be about instilling a moral code... Freedom is a double edged sword dude. You are free to make mistakes, you are free to totally fuck up. You are free to watch people going at it in the buff. Certainly doesn't sound as nice as the freedoms we champion, but it's still integral to the term freedom. It's making a movie. If we censor what can be in amovie, what else can we censor? Who gets to draw that line?

I'd rather the individual gets to draw that line for themself.

: Rage Head Aug 12 2005, 07:26 PM

Yeah, but what about sex on your tv and all the pop ups on your computer for your children? what about our next generation? The Baby Boomers, Generation X, The Perverts? I mean, legally, I think you should be able to film sex, and sell it, but keep it away from the tv programs and anything public, keep it as private as possible. I mean, really, it has to stop somewhere, I don't think you can keep slowly progressing it to the public. another question, do you think prostitution should be legal in America or wherever you all live, and if it's already legal, do you think it's okay?

: Holter Aug 12 2005, 08:05 PM

QUOTE(Lostphoenix @ Aug 12 2005, 02:52 PM)
and i don't think your post discusses the topic at hand so either pm me if you have matters to discuss that are off topic since the topic of matter is not me, but what the title suggests or comment on topic at hand.
[right][snapback]185798[/snapback][/right]



LP, whenever i talk to you neither of us is on topic in the end, its really what makes me enjoy having you on this forum so much, and especially our little encounters. Just remember that this site has moderators, and thankfully you are not one of them - so leave that kind of stuff to them and all will be well. grin.gif

Grimer, thats exactly what this debate is all about - whether or not people think the government should have their hands in peoples intimate relationships/personal relations. I do not think they should, but i also agree with Rage Head that the government should regulate where and how certian adult entertainment is available, like it does today.

I especially like this line grimer

QUOTE
I'd rather the individual gets to draw that line for themself.


when dealing with sexual relations. smile.gif

: Sara Aug 12 2005, 08:45 PM

QUOTE(Mars @ Aug 11 2005, 05:09 PM)
Again, I'm not debating whether people should have the RIGHT to look at porn.  Sure, you and Grimer and anybody else can feel legally entitled to do so.  MY point is rather that the bigger issue here is the NATURE of porn -- and no amount of hiding behind the flag (Sara, if you aren't in the u.s. excuse my phrasing, because that phrase has a history etc here) will eliminate the core of this issue. 

So often (again, in the u.s. particularly) people uphold the most ugly oppressive stuff (which is why I brought up the KKK earlier) by waving around the "This is a free country and we have the right to do this!" line.  And yes it is true.  But I think it is ridiculous for anyone to suggest that having the right to do something makes it some great thing that must be defended "In the name of freedom"! laughing.gif  The future of civil liberties, human rights, and world peace depends on defending the right to PORN?  wacko.gif  laugh.gif 

Is this really the kind of "freedom" people want to brag about, wanna wax about with the grandchildren by the fireside, wanna shout about with your fist in the air with your last dieing breath?  Porn?  "In the name of freedom"?

The world is not headed in a particularly lovely direction these days, if one hasn't noticed.  Frankly, anyone who spends a lot of energy defending their right to buy sexually-explicit materials is obviously concerned less with the oppression and suffering of others, and more with their own selfish pleasures.
[right][snapback]185593[/snapback][/right]


i understand all that. but u didnt answer my question. is the right to one's sexuality not a worthy cause? u keep comparing it to concepts like freedom and civil liberties, and the kkk and hate speech, and u trivilised it and assumed that those who defend the right to watch porn dont care for the oppressed out there.

porn is a dimension of the human sexuality. humans will fight for the right to their sexuality, it being their sexual orientation, masturbation, legal porn, or sex toys. is the right to sexuality not a good enough of a right to be juxtaposed with our other civil rights?

and by the way, i can assure you defending the right to one's sexuality does not automatically mean that one is not concered with the oppressed.

: Sara Aug 12 2005, 08:51 PM

QUOTE(Rage Head @ Aug 13 2005, 03:26 PM)
Yeah, but what about sex on your tv and all the pop ups on your computer for your children? what about our next generation? The Baby Boomers, Generation X, The Perverts? I mean, legally, I think you should be able to film sex, and sell it, but keep it away from the tv programs and anything public, keep it as private as possible. I mean, really, it has to stop somewhere, I don't think you can keep slowly progressing it to the public. another question, do you think prostitution should be legal in America or wherever you all live, and if it's already legal, do you think it's okay?
[right][snapback]185834[/snapback][/right]


porn is private. people who watch porn do it in private. it'd be a sick twisted idea to let it lie round for the children to pick it up. of course. no one is disputing that. i dont think porn will ever progress to that extent u speak of.

as for prostitution, it is legal here. i think it's better that it's legal, because now there's more control over it and less exploitation. it's also better because with more regulations STDs are better to control. it also means that young girls won't be dragged into i as easily as they were in the past.

: Mars Aug 12 2005, 09:25 PM

"He: Can I come home with you tonight?
She: No, I need my beauty sleep.
He: That's all right, I'm not interested in any part of you that's beautiful."

--Joke from Playboy magazine

user posted image


: Holter Aug 12 2005, 10:43 PM

mars, you do know that there are men in porn too right? dunno.gif

: Grimer 54 Aug 13 2005, 03:40 AM

QUOTE
mars, you do know that there are men in porn too right?


Right on holt. Also, Its a person's decision if they want to use, even say, exploit their own body for profit. You have no right to decide that women cannot exploit their own body... That's part of freedom: You're free to exploit yourself for profit. That's a major part of freedom, control over your own body. You may not view this as a positive thing, but, well, there it is.

I understand what you're saying mars, but your individual morals have no place in law. I'm sorry, but you have no say in the actions of an entire gender... each individual member of that gender should be allowed to decide for themself, if they want to use their bodies for profit. Otherwise, you're trying to instill your own dogma, and that certainly is not freedom.

: Mars Aug 13 2005, 08:55 PM

QUOTE(Grimer 54 @ Aug 13 2005, 06:40 AM)
You have no right to decide that women cannot exploit their own body... That's part of freedom: You're free to exploit yourself for profit.
[right][snapback]185852[/snapback][/right]

doh.gif

: Holter Aug 14 2005, 12:22 AM

good post rolleyes.gif

"their own body" - its their own, they can do what they want with it. slap your forehead to that all you want, but its true.

: Grimer 54 Aug 14 2005, 09:06 AM

QUOTE(Mars @ Aug 14 2005, 12:55 AM)
QUOTE(Grimer 54 @ Aug 13 2005, 06:40 AM)
You have no right to decide that women cannot exploit their own body... That's part of freedom: You're free to exploit yourself for profit.
[right][snapback]185852[/snapback][/right]

doh.gif
[right][snapback]185925[/snapback][/right]


If it makes you feel any better, men are allowed to exploit themselves as well. We are free to exploit ourselves- We live in a free society! You may not view it as a positive, but, you can't only advocate the 'good parts' of freedom. Because that's not freedom at all.

: Skavysab73 Oct 24 2009, 06:29 AM

I dont mind gays, I work with at least one, and I have one in the family. I will treat them the same as any other normal human being, so long as they treat me the same.

Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)