I read a very interesting article in the weekend magazine in regards to how, and if access to porn is changing how men perceive woman.
It took the premise that access to any sort of porn is freely available on the internet and that men (mainly) are consumed by it. This exposure to hardcore porn has made men no longer interested in real sex, but are consumed by porn sex. It then gave some (weak) examples of Sexual Attention Deficit Disorder (SADD, naturally ::) Of men who cannot have sexual intercourse without believing or fantasising they are in a porn scene.
OK there was a lot of stupid writing. Firstly the evidence trail is weak and is based on assumptions and personal belief. Points of view become facts, and belief principles become hypotheses. There is also no way of performing worthwhile science to establish facts, in my opinion.
But how does fit into our community?
I remember during the feminist years, adverts were rolled back to be 'non-sexist' as was language. This must be one of the most spectacular failures in social engineering I have seen. One glance at music videos demonstrates the lack of sexism that has been achieved in our society :laugh:
How are TG people perceived? As some glorious porn dream? From the article ; most men (sic) are reported to want nothing but sexual intercourse, in ever expanding porn conditions. They have a belief that woman are sex on legs and that penile penetration anywhere involves waves of orgasmic bliss.
I'm pretty sure this is not a belief among woman, including TG woman. But 'some' males have porn fantasies that being transformed into a 'hot' bimbo will allow his every desire to be fulfilled.
This no doubt creates the perception that having intercourse with a woman is a good thing for her. Even if she says NO, her satisfaction is guaranteed. Naturally raping a TG woman is doing her a glorious favour. Her orgasmic bliss will be screamed out.
I did find some of the opinion fascinating. It was very naive, but at least it was open.
I do think that Western society has got more violent and that one of the reasons is the depiction of violence in TV, movies etc. I'm also at a point that one of the reasons for this is that the depiction of violence is unrealistic. This might sound a foolish argument. In games etc the person who is killed is recreated. In movies the warrior dies heroically. The brutality of even a simple beating is not understood. I can hit some one in the head and that's OK. I've seen Rambo have a bullet in his back and it's a '->-bleeped-<- and damn' condition.
I see people die.
No they haven't, a beating is brutal and life changing. A blow to the head can be death or brain damage. Being shot isn't a goddam, I lie low and reload. It's one of your major organs may have been destroyed, you have just started to die unless you get help.
Yes there are exceptions in real life.
But does access to gross porn involving humiliation, violence and degradation affect our society.
I would like to open the discussion.
BTW I have use TG as an encompassing term for the sake of the argument. I have very open beliefs. I have no interest in porn :laugh:
Cindy
Trust you to open a Heinz can of worms Cindy! You must be feeling better.
The definition of pornography has changed over the last decade or so, with as far as I can tell, what was extreme becoming commonplace. That would have to indicate a certain amount of de-sensitisation and a need for more extreme stimulus to achieve the same gratification.
Coupled with the amount of violence in new areas of porn such as video games, I can't help feeling that the likelihood of a small percentage of people being unable distinguish between reality and fantasy has increased.
That is just my own suppositions, without any hard data, but no doubt it is out there somewhere.
Karen.
Ye Karen.
First premise : What is porn?
Possibly acts of sexual or non-sexual depictions are that are meant to titillate the observer?
Is there a difference between consensual and non-consensual porn. ? I think so!! But define those boundaries with Care.
So let us define one. The easy one: Paedophilia. It is totally abhorrent, it is evil. It is disgusting and it ruins the life of innocents. It is foul.
But seems to be very frequent with large secret organisations involved that have not only been implicated but proven to do despicable acts, including kidnap and prostitution of children. I weep for the children, and I pray that Maddie will be found safely.
When does this crime become acceptable?
When is porn not a crime?
She isn't a 14 yr old doing a BJ, she is an 18 yr old who looks like a 12 yr old.
So this is now acceptable porn? It is sexual fantasy, not pornography?
I realise and hope this debate can move into many areas of society, but lets keep to porn.
It might be a can of worms, at least I hope so.
So what is the difference between your 15 yr old son grabbing a 'mens magazine' - they are no longer porn., and masturbating to pictures of naked woman. And your 15 yr old daughter grabbing a picture Justin Wieber and doing the same.? Probably nothing. Both are healthy ways for teens to grow. So this isn't porn. this is healthy exploration of life, and as parents we smile at how they hid the same sort of stuff.
So when is it porn?
Hugs, yes Karen I'm feeling a bit better. I hate to say it I have been bored. A bored Cindy is a very dangerous creature :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
Cindy
To me, this article sounds sickening. It seems like it's making sexist, generalisations of men, because as we all know all men are sex obsessed and capable of rape.
As I understand it, it's not called being adventurous in the bed room, it's the man being perverse, forcing his fantasy on his female partner.
I'm sorry Angel maybe read my post fully? And think about it.
Cindy
Quote from: Angel On Acid on July 24, 2011, 06:07:55 AM
To me, this article sounds sickening. It seems like it's making sexist, generalisations of men, because as we all know all men are sex obsessed and capable of rape.
As I understand it, it's not called being adventurous in the bed room, it's the man being perverse, forcing his fantasy on his female partner.
Angel she didn't say ALL MEN.
Get honest though many men do think about sex every 6 seconds. I know i use to be one of them who had a male body and it wreaked havoc on my life and thinking. I hated it but many men do not. Many see it as their glory. On the other hand i have lived with young males who lived at a commune called twelve tribes and those young men had much self control. They also got married and never divorced. I am not saying any other way of living is wrong but i am saying people can and do live those kinds of lives and have great healthy relationships with their female partners. For heterosexual women these men are exactly what they seek.
Outside of that TT commune i do know some healthy couples (hetero) who have healthy lives as well. As we all know there are also some pretty evil things going on in society and in some religous communities. However, the TT has had some evil people join them and do bad things. That though isn't the norm there. Evil happens everywhere.
Openess to the truth is what is needed and that does have varying ways. Its when people hide things that people get hurt. Many times its the youth who are not told about the choices in life and the world around them that get detoured into thinking their is only what they see around them.
Yes schools need to educate people about the many many choices in the world. These choices shouldn't be limited to just non religous ways. But they shouldn't block education in lgbt ways either. Children (people) need to know and with openess and truth we can help point people to make free choices and not feel like they have to follow the crowd (peers).
As for porn it can be ok for some and also become a crazed lifestyle for others.
People need to know that what people see or experience isn't always healthy for everyone.
I have noticed over the years that the majority of people who call for the end of porn and the punishment of prostitutes and Johns are middle aged women who have allot of free time on thier hands. They all have the same thing in common...they believe it is their right and duty to police the bedrooms of others.
Granted there are men who are involved in the 'shut down the porn industry' types but they invariably get discovered with a whore in a seedy motel.
So long as it is consentual and not dangerous people should have a right to make porn and distribute it to those who wish to see it.
My only issue with porn is that I am too old to sell sex!
:P
I think that pornography needs to be broken down more for this to be debated. Of course there are some that are very degrading to women, but there are other ones that involve a normal couple doing normal things. I can't imagine that being any more harmful than anyone else having sex.
I find it mindblowing that it is completely ok to let little Tommy and Jane watch a TV program with explicit murder scenes and society as a whole shrugs and thinks nothing of it.
But if they should see pornography there is an inquisition.
So it is perfectly ok to let a child see murder, but not procreation.
Kinda makes me think we live in a very sick society.
Quote from: Lee on July 24, 2011, 10:59:05 AM
I think that pornography needs to be broken down more for this to be debated. Of course there are some that are very degrading to women, but there are other ones that involve a normal couple doing normal things. I can't imagine that being any more harmful than anyone else having sex.
I do agree with this take. It's like asking about the damage TV will cause. It's bit too broad.
If you can watch some stimulating porn with your lover and you both fine, who's to say that is bad?
In the olden days it was post cards or further back the Kamasutra (a tale of love) today it'd be porn no less.
Axelle
Quote from: cynthialee on July 24, 2011, 11:32:03 AM
I find it mindblowing that it is completely ok to let little Tommy and Jane watch a TV program with explicit murder scenes and society as a whole shrugs and thinks nothing of it.
But if they should see pornography there is an inquisition.
So it is perfectly ok to let a child see murder, but not procreation.
Kinda makes me think we live in a very sick society.
You sound almost exactly like my mother. :laugh:
QuoteIf you take a good, hard look at the American public in particular, you will see that a good portion of them are complete idiots. Sure, not EVERYONE is like this (and be thankful for that) but there a lot of people that are as dumb as dir
And the least intelligent have the most babies....Scary!
My experience with porn started when I was in my mid teens. My friend had a 8mm film that he "borrowed" from his dad. It was in B&W and no sound but it sure was exciting to watch. When I got old enough I remember going to XXX rated movies. The first few times I would close my eyes when ever there was a cum shot cause it was soo gross. Now days I have to fast forward to it cause I can't wait for it. Without a doubt you become desensitize over time and it takes more or better to get the same excitement. I don't know if it fuels my fantasies but real sex is never as good as it is in my fantasies.
On the whole I think porn is fine. There will be a certain number of people that get addicted to it or become perverted by it. Most people will just enjoy it. Use it to enhance their own sex lives. If you haven't noticed there are a lot of couples posting their own videos on the internet. Sex is a good thing. Let's take it away from the creepy guys in the trench coats and get out in the open. I don't believe it will make the more perverse fetishes more acceptable. I have looked at a lot of porn and there are a lot of things I would never watch.
Also welcome to web commerce. ~80% of websites are actually porn sites (don't think it has change recently, why should it?) --- and all make good money.
Axelle
PS: if being younger I can just feel the temptation, and if only to butter on my bread
I like some rather raunchy porn, but when I have sex it is relativly vanilla. So I don't think that porn desensitises and makes all people require kinkier and kinker to get off. That is just a character flaw of some people.
Quote from: cynthialee on July 24, 2011, 11:32:03 AM
I find it mindblowing that it is completely ok to let little Tommy and Jane watch a TV program with explicit murder scenes and society as a whole shrugs and thinks nothing of it.
But if they should see pornography there is an inquisition.
So it is perfectly ok to let a child see murder, but not procreation.
Kinda makes me think we live in a very sick society.
little Tommy and Jane is wathing a TV program that has acted out violence. Porn is real sex.
little Tommy and Jane can watch acted out sex in MANY movies which is different than a full blown close up of a man ejaculating in a woman's face.
I have three children of my own. I do not let them watch violent movies and hell would freeze over and the world gone to hell before I let my children watch porn. Porn isn't "The Princess Bride of Procreation."
The murders might be fake and the cumshot might be real but...
The subconscious does not know the diferance between a simulated murder that is very grafic and a real murder.
I saw Psycho long before I ever saw porn. At about 12.
I remember vividly the 'murder' in the movie. For years I took a chair into the bathroom to wedge it under the door knob whenever I took a shower.
I can't actually remember a thing about the movie the first time I saw porn at about 15 other than the fact I was watching porn. Nothing about the actors or the supposed story line. Not even the sex acts.
Which one had a greater impact on my psyche?
Quote from: Annah on July 24, 2011, 12:26:24 PM
I have three children of my own. I do not let them watch violent movies and hell would freeze over and the world gone to hell before I let my children watch porn. Porn isn't "The Princess Bride of Procreation."
DITTO i have 2 and they don't barely know there is such a thing as porn and all TV is monitored and the 19 yr old still doesn't even want to see it as he knows it made my life a living hell as i have told him in emails recently.. yes porn can really ruin a persons life as it did mine and that made transitioning and getting rid of any testosterone such a wonderful justification for starting and going so fast thru transition.
Porn for me separated reality from fantasy and i spent most of my life in fantasy which was a lonely place and the people who liked porn that i did meet made sex so cheap for me that they scared me away from any human contact sexually which was in a way a good thing for me.. Yes porn was a terrible thing for me.. i was introduced to it with old fashioned smoker tapes my older brother use to watch and playboys my other older brother left around.. i was barely 8 yrs old and it ruined my life until i finally transitioned and found the true me
I find it mindblowing that it is completely ok to let little Tommy and Jane watch a TV program with explicit murder scenes and society as a whole shrugs and thinks nothing of it. But if they should see pornography there is an inquisition.
I'm with you there. I got a lot of grief from other parents and non-parents when I told them I'd much rather my sons were watching Deep Throat than Rambo. The acting is better if nothing else. But, if both of these are some sort of 'projection fantasy' I'd much rather my boys were fantasizing about getting some awesome head than killing people with their bare hands. Hopefully at some point they would have sex, I would hope and pray that they never have to kill anyone.
This exposure to hardcore porn has made men no longer interested in real sex
I doubt that. First of all, masturbation is real sex, it's just not sex with another person. Second, I suppose that after you watch a couple volumes of The Best Blow-Jobs in the World it is possible that you find out that what up to that point had seemed like a pretty good BJ, turned out to be a rather weak and insincere effort. The best use of porn is as a real life 'how-to' about something that almost no one ever teaches you.
between your 15 yr old son grabbing a 'mens magazine' - they are no longer porn., and masturbating to pictures of naked woman.
All I had was the lingerie section of the Sears catalog. Currently I'd trade almost all the porn in the world* for the complete collection of Victoria's Secret catalogs.
* - minus the Traci Lords movies.
Quote from: Cindy James on July 24, 2011, 06:52:11 AM
I'm sorry Angel maybe read my post fully? And think about it.
Cindy
I'm sorry that you think I didn't read your post - I did. It wasn't meant to be a dig at your or your topic of converation. I'm just commenting on the tone of the article. I mean look at this:
QuoteFrom the article ; most men (sic) are reported to want nothing but sexual intercourse, in ever expanding porn conditions. They have a belief that woman are sex on legs and that penile penetration anywhere involves waves of orgasmic bliss.
Anyway, back on topic:
QuoteI find it mindblowing that it is completely ok to let little Tommy and Jane watch a TV program with explicit murder scenes and society as a whole shrugs and thinks nothing of it.
But if they should see pornography there is an inquisition.
So it is perfectly ok to let a child see murder, but not procreation.
Kinda makes me think we live in a very sick society.
I don't really agree with is. Violence is more natural to children than sex - they argue , have fights in playgrounds, among other things. Yeah this is a stretch from watching someone die in a film, but sex doesn't come into their life untill way later.
i prefer drawn porn. it usually has some kind of story that lets me identify with some of the characters, or at least enjoy the quirks in their personalities (even when they're very generative). and if there is no background story at all, it's usually because the characters are from another more well known series
there are lots of things i wouldn't ever want to see in real porn or sexual situations irl, but don't mind in drawn porn. extreme violence is one thing, underage individuals is another. maybe not something i should be too open about..? but most people who like things like these in drawn porn still know the difference between fantasy and reality, and wouldn't wanna cross any borders
so what then about real porn.. it's hard to believe that (legal) porn makes anyone bad unless their core was already rotten, and then it would only be a matter of time before they went totally bad anyway. anyone should get to do whatever they want as long as it doesn't violate any real living person's rights. computer nerds are supposedly better in bed than soccer players. i don't know what that says about the relation between porn-watching and a healthy interest in having sex with another person
I think it really depends on the individual whether porn is healthy or unhealthy.
I've been in two relationships. The first one was a selfish jerk who treated me as he treated the porn he was addicted to... as a means to quick gratification, and only his own gratification. He was one of the types that people who are against porn always hold up as their example of porn making men objectify women. The second one is with a very kind man who looks at it on occasion but recognizes the fact that it's kind of empty without a partner and would much rather do things with me. I think he's probably even gotten ideas from what he has seen in ways to make it better for the both of us, which is pretty awesome, so I wouldn't want to take it away from him. I have to admit I've looked a bit out of curiosity as well and I don't think I'm any worse for it either.
In my looking I've come across FTM transsexuals, or at least I think that's what they were, and they certainly seemed to be more objectified than most of the genetic-women I've seen, unfortunately. (to bring this back to the original point, I think). It makes me rather sad the way that the men seem to both drool over them and totally ridicule them for being somewhere in between transition (usually still with breasts but male from the waist down). It's sickening the way that they portray them as some sort of sexual fantasy freak show... D: (No offense to any people who are in transition! This is just what I have come across)
Violence is more natural to children than sex
Not sure if serious...
Oh yeah, everyone is objectified in porn. No group is objectified more than any other group. Be it: FtM, MtF, MLIFS, Grannys, Barely Legal, midget, every racial group. Every body type. Every combination of those too, so if fat Asian Grannies is your deal, you're in luck. See: Rule 34. Every type of wardrobe from lacy panties (regardless of gender) to business drag. Yes women are objectified for parts of their body, big boobs or tiny tits, shaved beaver to hair to everywhere. Ditto for men with the never ending dick of death.
Quote from: cynthialee on July 24, 2011, 11:32:03 AM
I find it mindblowing that it is completely ok to let little Tommy and Jane watch a TV program with explicit murder scenes and society as a whole shrugs and thinks nothing of it.
But if they should see pornography there is an inquisition.
So it is perfectly ok to let a child see murder, but not procreation.
Kinda makes me think we live in a very sick society.
Inquistion? Somebody call me? Pornography is immoral and illegal.
Kate D
Last I checked porn was legal.
And morality has not been established to be absolute in this matter.
Legality may vary depending on location, I'm not entirely sure.
Morality varies upon belief system as far as this is concerned, I think, as well as the subject matter. I'd hope that we could all agree that pedophilia and non-consensual pornography is immoral, but I suppose that even that might vary...
I think it's like anger. It can destroy you and you can do horrible things with it... or you can use it to learn and learn to use it in constructive ways. Many coins have two sides, and often times only one is seen for whatever reason.
Pornography is wrong
Kate D
Quote from: kate durcal on July 24, 2011, 09:42:37 PM
Pornography is wrong
Kate D
By your standards. Which do not hold sway on everyone else.
I can think of moral uses of porn.
Just because it engages your squik factor doesn't make it wrong.
(and I agree Sunnyside, kiddie porn and nonconsentual porn are abhorant)
I'm an artist who paints/draws what could be considered porn. I do it because heterosexual or heteronormative gay erotica (the vast majority of what's out there) is uninteresing to me, so I make up angrogynous, agendered, non-heteronormative stuff with interesting flawed people and put it on the Internets. I put filters/warnings on it, but kids do still look at it and comment. Nearly all of them are queer kids. I'm happy to give them a safe, relatively tame outlet with depictions of consensual non-hetero love, trust, and the beauty of gender nonconformity. So sue me.
And I'm a dude, and yes, I do think about sex quite often. Erotica and fantasy are what I consider healthy outlets. They do not prevent me from enjoying the real deal. I've been in a monogamous long-distance relationship for six years (sometimes I only get to see my love every four to six months), and sometimes painting a little porn is all that keeps me sane. I'm sure I just got put on some hate lists, but I really don't care.
In my opinion, porn is fine between two consential adults and can be used as an aid for sex. However, once it becomes an addiction for either person, then it is no longer healthy for that individual.
Porn, in my opinion is a lot like alcohol, smoking or whatever else that could be habit forming. If you are responsible enough to watch it, then have at it. If you begin to abuse it and become addicted, then you need to realize you have a problem.
I also draw the line at letting children watch porn. I won't even go into an explanation why as I do not feel that I should warrant one.
ok, I'm gonna jump in without having read many responses because I'm getting too many competing thoughts in my head.
My first thought about the easier access to porn now is one I don't think I've seen discussed much and It has a parallel to trans people in a subtle way.
IMO, the majority of people have SOME sexual fetish. Some are more respectable than others (such as the proverbial girl who is drawn to "bad boys") and many are even unknown because that button has never been pushed.
But they are often there just the same.
what internet porn (not really porn actually, just sexually driven material) has done is "normalize" many fetishes. that is, if you are a woman in a small rural town in, say, 1975 - and you happen to enjoy the fetish of being spanked, the LAST thing you want to do is let ANY other human find out, because you think it's weird. After all, no one you know likes it, right? (in other words, they too are scared to say so)
Comes the internet and it turns out that, apparently, lots of people share that fetish - suddenly you are not a "pervert" anymore. you can apply this to all sorts of fetishistic behavior in both sexes. Everything from swinging to crossdressing to amatuer night at the strip club is more "normal" because there are others like you after all.
Alongside that comes the perhaps unwarranted assumptions some will make - "I see women who like to be dominated, therefore all women like to be dominated" which is of course nonsense, but it's typical of the human tendency to stereotype ("I know one dumb country person, therefore all country people are dumb" and so forth) so you probably do get some men who are assuming all women are sluts based on their internet "learning"
But I think to an extent many women (not all!) are less reserved sexually because they see less of the "good girl" attitude being modeled. "Maybe the whole "good girls don't" thing isn't really true?" as it were - or even "i have as much right to casual sex as any man does"
Which, of course, re-enforces the misconceptions the guys I spoke of have. Only the more liberated (sexually) the average woman is, the less it's a misconception that she's available.
this isn't just the internet of course, it's in all media.
Honestly, I have a difficult time processing what i think of all this because my self-understanding of my female identity is not, frankly, that of a "good girl" and never has been, going back to my youth when none of these electronic influences were a part of my life. One of the things I mourn about my late transition and general unattractiveness is that I'll never likely be in a position to incorporate that part of my personality into my actual life - but I LIKE the idea of being very comfortable with being highly desirable sexually and not being constrained by a set of expectations about what "good girls" do. At least in principle.
So I'm not sure I see this as a bad thing. I rather think that the notion of everyone going around wearing masks to hide what their particular "deviancy" is may well me the more unhealthy model.
And to explain my comment about parallels - how many of us found the courage to be ourselves only after finding out there were many more others like us than we had imagined? how many of us didn't fully understand the whole TS/TG community until the internet was freely available? We were less likely to see ourselves as "freaks" when we knew how much we were not alone.
and we are healthier, mentally, for having the ability to take off our masks, no?
My dad was addicted to alcohol and porn. Growing up it made me feel disgusted with being female even more than i normally would. I remember when i was 15 years old, my parents were having problems, dads drinking was as usual terrible, he moved into what was my bedroom, i had to move into the smaller one. He completely plastered the walls in pornographic pictures. When i saw it, you can imagine my horror!
There are times when Porn is really bad!
Now Im much older and wiser... and Soft porn to me is okay, mags like playboy. But i still have trouble with accepting hard porn. Thats just my opinion on it and why i probably see things the way i do now. My dad really made me see porn as something to be ashamed of, something degrading to women.
I'm one of those FTM who actually aren't into porn!
Quote from: cynthialee on July 24, 2011, 11:32:03 AM
I find it mindblowing that it is completely ok to let little Tommy and Jane watch a TV program with explicit murder scenes and society as a whole shrugs and thinks nothing of it.
But if they should see pornography there is an inquisition.
So it is perfectly ok to let a child see murder, but not procreation.
Kinda makes me think we live in a very sick society.
I don't entierly disagree except in this regard:
What you see on mainstream TV is SIMULATED death, we all agree.
but in the same manner, it's quite possible for them to see a good bit of SIMULATED sexuality as well. Not as much as porn, but enough to suggest that both are fairly well available.Honestly, i think the ship has sailed on "what children are exposed to" - the difference between what I could POSSIBLY see in the 70's (yes, a few had access to adult material readily because of location or parental neglect but a distinct minority) and what my son can see without trying hard in the last decade is almost immeasurable.
Quote from: Angel On Acid on July 24, 2011, 06:07:55 AM
To me, this article sounds sickening. It seems like it's making sexist, generalisations of men, because as we all know all men are sex obsessed and capable of rape.
As I understand it, it's not called being adventurous in the bed room, it's the man being perverse, forcing his fantasy on his female partner.
Sorry Angel.
From the article ; most men (sic) are reported to want nothing but sexual intercourse,
I had put (sic) after the quote telling people that was what written in the article and not my belief.
Hugs
Cindy
Some interesting responses.
But few have tackled do 'we' look at porn that 'interest' us or do we get addicted to prn and wish to live out those fanatsies, no matter what harm it may do to others?
A few thoughts. Many violent rapists were found to enjoy watching violent rape type porn. Did they develop their evil from watching the porn, or did they become attracted to violent porn because that was what they liked?
I was thinking of, possibly, the only experiment that has, accidentally, been carried out to test that hypothesis..
Many people responded that paedophilia porn was totally unacceptable. And indeed calling it pornography is almost justifying a sick criminality.
But paedophilia porn must be one of the truly disgusting events that is also viewed by people who have no interest in it. Law enforcement people, judges, lawyers etc have to look at such material as part of their job to arrest and prosecute offenders. There is no evidence that I am aware of that any of these people have taken up a prurient interest in such material.
Yes there are members of these professions who are paedophiles. But there is no evidence that viewing material made them so - they would use it as a defence, and I can't recall that happening.
So does this suggest 'we' don't become addicted?
Cindy
Pornography is immoral and illegal.
You forgot fattening. And in most of the US it's not illegal, and in at least one part (the San Fernando Valley) it's a major industry. And some moralities seem to be against it, but many are not sexually repressed and prudish and see such things as a natural part of life.
Well I never knowingly let my kids watch porn, I was just saying that if it were Throat or Rambo I find Throat a lot less disgusting, and a lot more wholesome. Which is not any sort of endorsement for Deep Throat, it's more along the lines of how perverted and truly disturbing Rambo really is.
If the choice is between sex and violence, how sick do you have to be to choose violence? If it's all the same I'd just as soon hang out with the sex people than the violence people. Let's see... one one hand we have fistfights, guns and knives, and on the other side we have boobies, naked bodies, and a heavy emphasis on oral stimulation and pretty lingerie. Oh yeah, the sex people throw much, much better parties for sure on that.
What you see on mainstream TV is SIMULATED death
Perhaps, but the brain does not process it that way. Indeed movies and TV shows take on a hyper-reality that make them seem/feel very real. It creates reference points that can often overwhelm reality. Which is why so many people when asked how they would handle something refer to some movie/TV show and not lessons from their own life - many people have more memories of what they've seen on TV then they do of their own real life. And among the reasons that it works that way is that big production shows as close as they can get to killing without offing the person. Rule 1 in the Union Stagehand Guide is (and this is true): The gun is always real. The gun is always loaded. The Feds have a department in the ATF where all they do is send agents to film and TV shoots to make sure the guns are OK, and the gun laws are followed. It's like a car crash in the movies. Yes it's scripted. Yes it's highly designed. Yes there are camera and editing tricks at work. But when the director says 'action' that car is going to crash, for real. A controlled crash, but a car crash none the less.
And, it's one thing to know all of that on an intellectual level. Yes, it's a set, they are actors not the people they are portraying - we know this, yet our feelings and emotions easily overwhelm that intellectual notion. That's why people cry at sad and/or emotional moments in a good movie. That's why people scream at a horror flick. The ability to do that is one of the 20th Centuries true art forms, and it's also why the good people get paid so much to do it. When you're watching Titanic are you thinking (like I am) 'how exactly did they get that effect?' or are you (like most people) thinking: Damn get out of that ship, it's sinking. (Which is also why people don't like watching movies with me)
And people know that no matter how 'real' porn is, it's a staged thing through and through. A few years ago they shot a bunch of porno on super-high def and the result was: Yeah, we really don't want to see that much reality in that kind of detail.
Tammy is spot on about the net linking up people of persuasions not considered inside the norm with each other. Alt.sex was The Social Network 1.0 in the early days of the 'WELL and other pioneers of on-line (and back then it was phone lines and an acoustic coupler) access. I think that the Furry and the Sissies of Petticoat Pond are perfect examples of such networks forming and/or radically growing from almost day one of public access to the Web.
I have to agree with Tammy as well. The ease of access that the internet now provides helps people to feel more normal about the fetishes that they already had and were ashamed of because they see others with the same, and honestly (in most cases) that's a good thing! No one should feel ashamed about what they desire to do in bed, or in the kitchen, etc... and it may also help them find someone who is more compatible for them in these areas if they feel like they can talk about the subject without a great deal of shame and fear of rejection looming over them.
And honestly I'm quite glad for the parallel that Tammy drew. I would've had no clue why something felt off about myself if it weren't for the internet as I thought that all transgendered people were transsexuals and I knew that I didn't fit there either. The internet is helping me explore my gender (or possible lack thereof) in the same way that it helps me explore my sexuality and many others do the same. (though I have found I'm just as vanilla as before I started looking, lol XD)
I believe you have got to have something wrong with you in the first place. I play video games that can be considered violent and im a peaceful person. I really believe the tendency needs to be there in the first place for someone to be effected by it. Games and videos are just fantasy. Unfortunately some people out there cant tell the difference.
Regardless of porn, we live in a world where people are thought of (and think of themselves) in terms of tools or products to be consumed - ask anyone who has applied for a job. At least in porn there is a given understanding all round that each member (and each member's member) is being objectivised. I say, sort out the cold, compartmentalised areas of normal life before going for porn.
Hello,
There is a point of view that no one now thinks of. Houses with separate bedrooms are fairly historically new. For most of human history, children heard and saw their parents doing naked, or half-naked, stuff. People lived in huts, cabins, and even tents. Not much was hidden.
The same with violence. Think of all the stupid wars, raiding parties, general violence of the past 50,000 years. Children not only witnessed it but were a part of it.
There have always been violent freaks and there always will be. There will also always be viscous sexual assaults. Blaming any kind of porn media doesn't completely do the job of getting to the root causes of sex crimes. Which, in my opinion, is human nature.
Whether porn causes its viewers to become desensitized is not really important as long as no one is being hurt. On the other hand, some people may be influenced to the point where they forget there are consequences for their actions and step over the line. My personal thinking is that these people are the ones we'd have to look out for in centuries past. There's not a lot you can do about it except, teach your children how to be safe and if you see anyone going down the wrong path, try to influence them in positive ways.
Just my imagination, I mean, thoughts. Sorry for misspellings and the like.
ps.
as Pica said - we're all a bunch of tools.
Trust it to be the porn topic that pulls you out of the void - how you doing you ol' slapper? :angel:
I'm okay. I passed through some depressions and anxiety ridden phases, but lived. I got a part time job that keeps my roof where it belongs and prevents my plates from being bare.
How are you?
Quote from: Rebis on July 25, 2011, 10:33:37 AM
I'm okay. I passed through some depressions and anxiety ridden phases, but lived. I got a part time job that keeps my roof where it belongs and prevents my plates from being bare.
How are you?
Pretty same, still in the school, becoming a grizzled pillar of my community - just turned twenty six so officially old now. Reading a bit more, writing a bit less and becoming worryingly keen on some opera - eesh.
I think violent people are drawn to violent porn. I don't think "normal" people can be changed by watching actors on TV. Yes I definitely agree the internet has made it easier to feel normal if you have a fetish since you now know a lot of people share it with you. I won't go into the things I like to do in bed but let's say not everyone I've had relationships with shared them too. If they did then great and if they didn't I would drop it. I have respect for the women and men I have been with. If you respect your partner then you would never put them in a place they were uncomfortable. Sex is about mutual enjoyment. I could never be controlling or violent to another person. People that are violent and controlling are that way in or out of the bedroom. I don't think porn has anything to do with that. I think pedophiles are sick people. How they become this way I don't know but again I can't believe it is from looking at porn. That kind of pron is hard to find. you have to be looking for it.
I don't think there's anything wrong with porn, unless it's CP, beastiality, or anything else that's obviously (and rightfully) illegal.
I'm going to go out on a limb and probably piss everyone off, but I don't think porn "degrades women".
The women that get into that industry, and get somewhere with it, make MASSIVE amounts of money. If they don't want to screw for money, then don't get into the porn industry. End of story.
The people that think porn is life real life? They probably deserve the loneliness and rejection they get. People that act out violence and rape from porn/movies/games? They're probably screwed up in the first place. It feels like this argument has been going on forever. Games don't make killers. Movies don't make killers. Porn doesn't make rapists.
Stupidity, detachment, and being pushed too far makes a killer. Trauma, mental illness, and sadism makes a rapist. Watching a pair of silicone implants is not going to turn Average Joe, the decent guy, into a alley-stalking rape monger.
Unless I'm completely wrong, which is absolutely possible, and in that case we're all ->-bleeped-<-ed.
People seem to forget that "wrong" and "evil", for the most part, are entirely subjective. What one person thinks is acceptable might disgust me, and what I enjoy might horrify someone else. But then again, I think that as long as it's not real, people should be able to watch whatever the hell they want. It might make me cringe, it might piss me off more than anything, but unless they're ACTING on it, I don't care. I'm not into thought police.
Quote from: Pica Pica on July 25, 2011, 10:59:12 AM
Pretty same, still in the school, becoming a grizzled pillar of my community - just turned twenty six so officially old now. Reading a bit more, writing a bit less and becoming worryingly keen on some opera - eesh.
I began writing less in the twenties. If you have a good backlog of material behind you, it'll be perfect for rewrites as the years pass. All I had were some stupid poems.
Quote from: JulieC. on July 25, 2011, 11:57:22 AM
Sex is about mutual enjoyment.
I don't feel good for saying this, but sex is for procreation. Reproduction is a genetic calling. Some people have it more than others, but despite what is in a person's conscious mind, the drive is to reproduce. Nearly all of the "aberrant" sexual behavior/exploration of males is because they are driven to seek stimulation.
I don't mean that sex is for procreation in a moral sense, but in the naturalistic sense of animal existence. We are animals with big giant brains that are so entirely complicated that we forget we are animals.
I've been reading articles that explain that men are behind the search for 'giant penis' on the internet. The thought is that other primates show dominance or other signalling by showing their genitals. People are doing as their genetic code tells them to do. If I find the article, I'll post it.
Quote from: JulieC. on July 25, 2011, 11:57:22 AM
I think pedophiles are sick people. How they become this way I don't know but again I can't believe it is from looking at porn.
just wanted to say that i object to the thought that all pedophiles are sick people
i know pedophilia is considered a mental disorder, but still...
being sexually attracted to someone doesn't mean one would rape that person
and rape has nothing to do with sexual attraction
some people find themselves being sexually attracted to kids, many of them (i know of at least 3) would never want to do anything that might hurt a child
other people rape kids for the sense of control without really being pedophiles (i unfortunately know a few of this type too)
i think child abusers and other rapists are sick. i also think people who make, spread and watch cp for their own enjoyment or purse are sick
but i don't think people with paraphilia are, unless this makes them violate other people's rights
and just to stay on topic, i don't think porn can make people into rapists. either they have it in them or they don't, and those who have it in them don't necessarily have to watch porn for inspiration to commit atrocious acts upon other people
Quote from: kate durcal on July 25, 2011, 01:47:52 PM
Thanks for reminding me Tekla!
Pronography is immoral (this means wrong), should be illegal (I stand corrected), is fattening, and it is only enjoyed by those with an under developed mind (AKA feelbe mind)
You are wrong. Because I say so.
I am right, because I say so,
Quote from: Pica Pica on July 25, 2011, 02:55:21 PM
I am right, because I say so,
I full-heartedly agree with you there, Pica, lol XD
But no, seriously, it contributes so little to discussion to just sit there and say "you are wrong!" ...it was getting to me a bit so I went for humor.
Actually I think there is a right and wrong, and a moral compass that leads to those answers, but that compass has it's reasons. Something is wrong because it negatively affects those beyond the individual for example.
Quote from: Pica Pica on July 25, 2011, 03:05:02 PM
Actually I think there is a right and wrong, and a moral compass that leads to those answers, but that compass has it's reasons. Something is wrong because it negatively affects those beyond the individual for example.
I think that most things are both right and wrong depending on the circumstances. That wasn't my main problem with it. She doesn't even try to explain why she thinks it is wrong, and then she goes on to insult people who use it... even though there have been a few in this thread already who have expressed that they use it. There is no better way to alienate people who need help, if you think they need help, than to insult them on a personal level. But really... just stating something is wrong and not explaining the why behind it won't convince anyone that it is wrong and contributes nothing to discussion. I ignored her the first time because honestly I just read her statements and take her for a troll. I'm just hoping that she isn't a troll and that this says something to her... I don't know. *sigh*
Kate;
That was a underhanded insult to me and a number of other posters here who have admited they like and view porn.
Please remove that insult. I am not going to smite you but you kinda deserve it.
I mean seriously....feeble mind?
Quote from: Rebis on July 25, 2011, 01:45:07 PM
I don't feel good for saying this, but sex is for procreation. Reproduction is a genetic calling. Some people have it more than others, but despite what is in a person's conscious mind, the drive is to reproduce. Nearly all of the "aberrant" sexual behavior/exploration of males is because they are driven to seek stimulation.
I don't mean that sex is for procreation in a moral sense, but in the naturalistic sense of animal existence. We are animals with big giant brains that are so entirely complicated that we forget we are animals.
I've been reading articles that explain that men are behind the search for 'giant penis' on the internet. The thought is that other primates show dominance or other signalling by showing their genitals. People are doing as their genetic code tells them to do. If I find the article, I'll post it.
Um, no. Speaking as someone who studied animal biology at the college level, sex is not merely procreative. It also, especially in social creatures, forms bonds, resolves conflicts, and establishes hierarchy. Please read up on the subject before stating an opinion as fact.
I could also comment on the inaccuracy and pseudoscience in the rest of your post, but I just do not have the time or inclination.
Quote from: cynthialee on July 25, 2011, 03:45:14 PM
Kate;
That was a underhanded insult to me and a number of other posters here who have admited they like and view porn.
Please remove that insult. I am not going to smite you but you kinda deserve it.
I mean seriously....feeble mind?
PLease smite me migter smiter! >:-)
Looking at pronography is like the starving dude looking through the window at people eating at a restuarant; and paying for the privilage to do so, wow! so smart...
paying for the privilage to do so
Wow, you pay for porn? That's so last century. No wonder you're mad.
Quote from: tekla on July 25, 2011, 09:57:40 PM
paying for the privilage to do so
Wow, you pay for porn? That's so last century. No wonder you're mad.
LOL, you are bad to te bone. Luv U Kate D
fee·ble-mind·ed (fbl-mndd)
adj.
1. Deficient in intelligence.
2. Exhibiting a marked lack of intelligent consideration and forethought:
Quote from: kate durcal on July 25, 2011, 09:24:55 PM
Looking at pronography is like the starving dude looking through the window at people eating at a restuarant; and paying for the privilage to do so, wow! so smart...
I cannot currently enjoy sex as I am, so I enjoy the fact that other people are enjoying it.
Em-pa-thy
The intellectual identification with or vicarious experiencing of the feelings, thoughts, or attitudes of another.
This debate is starting to become rather petty. I love hearing why people believe the things they do, but attacking rather than explaining is a poor way to convince people.
I'm not much into porn, but it doesn't really bother me much either :) I'm one of those artsy fartsy types that views the human body as a beautiful work of art and often find someones rendition of what's "Hot" rather amusing :laugh: I appreciate a beautiful body, but I'm not likely to get all hot and bothered or turned on by it
If and when I find that special someone that I wish to be intimate with, they and I will fully investigate what hot and bothered truly means :icon_eyebrow:
Love and sex are epic, but pay to see other people <not allowed> having intecourse with each other..... really
Quote from: kate durcal on July 25, 2011, 10:53:28 PM
Love and sex are epic, but pay to see other people <not allowed> having intecourse with each other..... really
Yes, really :)
Trust me, it's not hard to find free porn of people who seem to be very much in love and having the time of their lives.
rape has nothing to do with sexual attraction
TRUE. The most basic understanding of rape starts with rape being about power and control and punishment and has nothing to do with sex or attraction.
all pedophiles are sick people
TRUE if we are working from a strict definition of the word, and few people do. Specifically it's a primary or exclusive sexual interest in prepubescent children (generally age 13 years or younger, though onset of puberty may vary). The way CP and many other statues work, and the entire To Catch a Predator mentality tends to view it as any sex at all under the age of 18. I'm surprised the morality police haven't shut down productions of Romeo and Juliet because while R&J are too busy ->-bleeped-<-ing like bunnies to listen to their parents she is 'almost 14" which means, she is 13 in that play. So if we're talking about true CP with prepubescent humans, then sure, if we're talking about 17 year olds, that gets a lot trickier.
i don't think porn can make people into rapists
TRUE. Rape is independent of porn. In fact many of the most puritanical society's, those that would heavy restrict materials with strong sexual content, have pretty high rates of rape. In fact I think porn prevents rape. But hey, don't believe me. A study at the Northwestern School of Law found that while the availability/quality/distribution of porn has skyrocketed in the last 25 years the reported incidents of rape have decreased 85%. That's pretty amazing stuff.
http://anthonydamato.law.northwestern.edu/Adobefiles/porn.pdf (http://anthonydamato.law.northwestern.edu/Adobefiles/porn.pdf)
or...A 10 percent increase in Net access yields about a 7.3 percent decrease in reported rapes.
http://www.slate.com/id/2152487/ (http://www.slate.com/id/2152487/)
or...Indeed it appears from our data from Japan, as it was evident to Kutchinsky (1994), from research in Europe and Scandinavia, that a large increase in available sexually explicit materials, over many years, has not been correlated with an increase in rape or other sexual crimes. Instead, in Japan a marked decrease in sexual crimes has occurred.
http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/1961to1999/1999-pornography-rape-sex-crimes-japan.html (http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/1961to1999/1999-pornography-rape-sex-crimes-japan.html)
I think pedophiles are sick people. How they become this way I don't know
Obviously because of something that happened, or they associated with childhood. They just took it in the wrong direction. But lots of fetish behavior, like a good over the knee spanking, have childhood roots. Really, for all the "Sex is for Adults" rhetoric, most real sexual activity is, if not juvinale, at least highly adolescent.
Pornography is immoral
I must have missed the 11th Commandment somehow, mine only go up to 10. And I'm also missing where Jesus railed against people spanking the monkey to naughty drawings (and Jesus was living in a Roman occupied country, so there was plenty of porn, tons of it). There is a very specific prohibition against adultery, which has been used to condemn anything and everything sexual, but if you actually read the book, you'll find that when they say 'adultery' they don't mean unwed sex, premarital sex, or masturbation, they mean sex between married people who are not married to each other.
A substantial amount of the porno out there is not even people having full out, hard on sex. It's pictures of naked, or nearly naked women. That's all. Assuming that the model was willing, the photographer was willing, and the viewer was willing then I'm having trouble seeing the immorality of that. I thought the body was god's creation, a temple of the lord and all that.
And who exactly is the immoral person in all of that? The model, the photographer, the viewer, or no one until someone masturbates to it? You know if it doesn't turn anyone on (appeal to prurient interest as the legal people say it) it can't be porn by definition.
And given that entire prurient interest stuff, is anything that appeals to anyone's prurient interest automatically porn? If so there are a bunch of people who put together catalogs from Sears and J.C. Penny's back in the 60s who should be doing some time, because I sure used the 'intimate apparel' section as part of my wicked ways.
Or what about people who have some weird fetish, like shoes? Should all shoe catalogs be banned? All shoe shots? Any picture of a woman wearing a shoe?
should be illegal
I'm guessing that's straight out of the right-wing 'smaller government' handbook. We already have more people in jail (raw numbers or %, either way) than ANY OTHER COUNTRY, and now we ought to be tossing in every guy who is wanking it to a bunch of pictures of naked women? Or everyone whose ever taken photos of their own or someone else's naughty bits? Really? Is that your idea of 'land of the free'? Honestly, is that what you think the government should be doing?
And, here's the not so minor problem with all that. Define it. Yup, please define 'pornography' in such a way that it's also not going to eliminate half the art currently in museums. So that in your haste to make sure that weaker minds do not prevail you also don't put The Birth of Venus by Botticelli, Michelangelo's David, and The Cealing of the Sistine Chapel into the trash heap as well. Our best legal minds have been over it, and over it, and over it and here is their considered, and august opinion: We can't define it, but we know it when we see it. OK, groovy, so who's going to make that call? You or me? I have a PhD, 40 years of working in 'the arts' at least loosely defined, so I'm qualified. Or, you get the only people who could really make such a call, and those are artists, and they are not going to ban anything, so you're back at square one.
Oh yeah, you know the image of 'justice' we use, entitled Spirit of Justice, the one that is in the US Department of Justice, and in a lot of courts in the US where such cases are going to be heard - well she's flashing some tit. As is La Liberté Guidant le Peuple by Delacroix, hell she's flashing both of 'em (and major tatas they are too) - and that's a sacred national symbol in France and the inspiration for the Statue of Liberty. I was wondering if you favored smashing them to bits, blowing them up, or perhaps burning them in big public rallies? You could toss on all the books, magazines and records that you find offensive too. I could point you in the direction of planning events like this. Maybe you could even say a few words to begin the festivities. How 'bout: "No to decadence and moral corruption! Yes to decency and morality in family and state!" That was a big hit for Goebbels the last time we did this. I always tripped out on the fact that amoung the stuff they burned were the works of nineteenth-century German-Jewish poet Heinrich Heine. He wrote 1821 play, Almansor "Dort, wo man Bücher verbrennt, verbrennt man am Ende auch Menschen"* I'm not sure if that's poetic, or ironic, or both.
* - "Where they burn books, they will in the end also burn people."
WOW, Tekla the the master of the one liners response, indulges us with a full page response; from now on we should call you the porno champ Brilliantly argued, all good points, but I still consider porno immoral.
Kate D
On what grounds? For what reason? And who, any, and all, involved in it are immoral, and who gets a pass?
Quote from: tekla on July 25, 2011, 11:30:07 PM
On what grounds? For what reason? And who, any, and all, involved in it are immoral, and who gets a pass?
Becouse more often than not somebody gets exploit and abused by it, and that is immoral (wrong).
From the article http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-mcdonald-stagliano3-2008jul03,0,1018875.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-mcdonald-stagliano3-2008jul03,0,1018875.story)
"I have been in the porn business since 1973. To say that it is "rife with abuse, coercion and drug addiction," one must provide real evidence rather than a few anecdotal stories. For someone to work in porn as a producer for more than just a single film, he or she must cultivate a reputation as a good person to work for. This is a relatively small business, and if anyone is abusing performers in any way, that information is spread very quickly through the whole industry. No one has consistently done this in my business and survived; you just can't get away with it. When I was on the fringe of the Hollywood entertainment industry in the 1970s, it seemed that there were more sleazy characters preying on wannabe actors and actresses in the non-porn world than in the porn world."
Becouse more often than not somebody gets exploit and abused by it, and that is immoral (wrong).
Actually I doubt it. The growth in porn on the web has really been fueled, not by big studios and companies, but by amateurs and cottage industry stuff where someone sets up a site (often the model themselves) and provides photos that they have total control over. So, if you take the exploitation and abuse out of it (and I'll agree that exploitation and abuse are wrong, I'll also be happy to point out that the wardrobe in your closet probably has more exploitation and abuse contained in it than you can find in porn), and everyone is willing, and consenting (and of legal age) then is it still immoral?
Kia Ora,
Is homophobia associated with homosexual arousal?
Adams HE, Wright LW Jr, Lohr BA.
Source
Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens 30602-3013, USA.
Abstract
"The authors investigated the role of homosexual arousal in exclusively heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexual individuals. Participants consisted of a group of homophobic men (n = 35) and a group of nonhomophobic men (n = 29); they were assigned to groups on the basis of their scores on the Index of Homophobia (W. W. Hudson & W. A. Ricketts, 1980). The men were exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian videotapes, and changes in penile circumference were monitored. They also completed an Aggression Questionnaire (A. H. Buss & M. Perry, 1992). Both groups exhibited increases in penile circumference to the heterosexual and female homosexual videos. Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies ! ".
::) Now that's interesting, ::) I wonder if this would apply to a "pornophobe" ?
Sigmund Freud, did theorise that people often have the most hateful and negative attitudes towards things they secretly crave, but feel that they shouldn't have.
::) On a personal level I have no interest whatsoever in watching nor participating in sex, however "Different "strokes" for different folks !" Part of my personal philosophy is "Whatever turns one on !" Just so long as they are not harming others with their actions...
Metta Zenda :)
Quote from: kate durcal on July 25, 2011, 09:24:55 PM
PLease smite me migter smiter! >:-)
Looking at pronography is like the starving dude looking through the window at people eating at a restuarant; and paying for the privilage to do so, wow! so smart...
how do you know he's starving? Lot's of sexually active people/couples enjoy some form of erotica.
Maybe he just likes the way food looks?
Quote from: tekla on July 25, 2011, 11:45:18 PM
Becouse more often than not somebody gets exploit and abused by it, and that is immoral (wrong).
Actually I doubt it. The growth in porn on the web has really been fueled, not by big studios and companies, but by amateurs and cottage industry stuff where someone sets up a site (often the model themselves) and provides photos that they have total control over. So, if you take the exploitation and abuse out of it (and I'll agree that exploitation and abuse are wrong, I'll also be happy to point out that the wardrobe in your closet probably has more exploitation and abuse contained in it than you can find in porn), and everyone is willing, and consenting (and of legal age) then is it still immoral?
Bingo, on all points.
Quote from: kate durcal on July 25, 2011, 11:28:53 PM
WOW, Tekla the the master of the one liners response, indulges us with a full page response; from now on we should call you the porno champ Brilliantly argued, all good points, but I still consider porno immoral.
Kate D
To illustrate the difficulty of a broad application of morality over a population which disagrees, consider that all of us here are considered immoral by a great many people in this country - a considerable majority in many areas.
In fact, the filters on the computers at my local library blocks this very site.
Quote from: Lee on July 25, 2011, 11:00:18 PM
Yes, really :)
Trust me, it's not hard to find free porn of people who seem to be very much in love and having the time of their lives.
I'm aware of whole sites which are devoted to nothing but "amatuer" porn wherein couples film themselves, or some combination with the people they swing with, for the purpose of putting them online - it's a form of second level exhibitionism, so to speak, which excites not a few people.
I'm sure the more high-minded among us think no more of self-exploitation (is that even possible?) then of exploitation by others -- but such people are clearly no one's victims.
* ... but I still consider porno immoral.
Kate D *
That's the problem with *morals* ... and for that matter ethics on the other hand.
When porn becomes unethical I have issues with it, and for that matter with all things unethical and not just porno.
*Morals* in my understanding is based on *Dogma* drummed into you by *moral teachings*. The Taliban does a VERY good job of that, so did Herr Göbbels and company.
Did/do they ever think or understand that they where/are unethical?
I don't think they even knew ethics.
I do not have any problem with porn so long it's not unethical.
By the way masturbation is still considered immoral by MANY.
It sure in not unethical, unless we may define a "new ethics".
My 2 cents,
Axelle
PS: Tekla, I think a VERY thoughtful essay, impressive I think.
PPS: Maybe you feel some day to explain the difference between morality and ethics...? You seem real good at this stuff and not in need to write a whole book about it :-)
Tekla the the master of the one liners response, indulges us with a full page response; from now on we should call you the porno champ
It's easy to write forever, all it takes is time and the ability to sequence. One liners are much harder - that takes near perfection, lots of practice, and one hell of a little editor running around in your head.
And I don't see it as championing pornography (it seems to be doing well enough on its own). I see it as defending freedom from those who would seek to impose their beliefs on others by using the law, and protecting Art from the Barbarians who are already inside the gate. The first is my obligation as an American patriot, the second is my responsibility as a scholar and a card-carrying member of The Artista. And since I think that the decision as to what is Art is a collective one made over time, seems to me we need to protect all of it.
To wit: I wasn't just being a smart-ass about the Spirit of Justice statue showing us some titty. Bush II's attorney general, well here is the Wiki on that.
In January 2002, the partially nude female statue of the Spirit of Justice, which stands in the Great Hall of the Justice Department, where Ashcroft held press conferences, was covered with blue curtains, along with its male counterpart, the Majesty of Law. It was speculated this change was made because Ashcroft felt that reporters were photographing him with the female statue in the background to make fun of his church's opposition to pornography. A Justice Department spokeswoman said that Ashcroft knew nothing of the decision to spend $8,000 for the curtains; a spokesman said the decision for permanent curtains was intended to save on the $2,000 per use rental costs of temporary curtains used for formal events
Yeah, that's right, he covered up Justice the Statue, and he pretty much raped the Constitution while he was at it. So covering the symbolic representation of justice seems fitting at the very least. Guess he didn't want to see her weep over The Patriot Act, Extreme Rendition, Guantanamo Bay, and the use of torture.
And I'm sure my nuns would have freaked out had I ever brought a poster of La Liberté Guidant le Peuple to school. I'm just as sure that there are copies of that in French grade schools like we have posters of Washington Crossing the Delaware.
Actually the age of unrestricted consent in Canada is 16 for girls, unless it's anal, in which case it's 18. I would have loved to hear the committee debate on that.
Not to be outdone, but in Florida it's illegal to ->-bleeped-<- fish. However (unless they passed one this year) it's still OK to do Fido the dog, Elsie the Cow and Mister Ed (a horse of course).
It's weird thinking of Canada as rabidly homophobic.
Quote from: Wolfsnake on July 25, 2011, 06:18:03 PM
Um, no. Speaking as someone who studied animal biology at the college level, sex is not merely procreative. It also, especially in social creatures, forms bonds, resolves conflicts, and establishes hierarchy. Please read up on the subject before stating an opinion as fact.
I could also comment on the inaccuracy and pseudoscience in the rest of your post, but I just do not have the time or inclination.
I wasn't being entirely literal. I was generalizing about sex and procreation. I'm aware of the other reasons behind sexual behavior but did not want to write too many words on it.
Of course my post is inaccurate. I operate through intuition and fully expect people to to correct or add to what I say. I am an authority on nothing. My point is that it may be futile to bang our heads over what is merely nature.
I may also be slippery when wet.
Quote from: tekla on July 25, 2011, 09:57:40 PM
paying for the privilage to do so
Wow, you pay for porn? That's so last century. No wonder you're mad.
It'd be even worse to pay to have sex
with porn.
Quote from: Sarah7 on July 26, 2011, 11:11:00 AM
And it isn't just 18 for anal. It requires the couple to be married or both at least 18, and only 2 people can be present.
That's strangely hilarious/weird, the part about "not if there's more than 2 people there". Why does the presence of a 3rd person make it suddenly immoral (or their absence make it suddenly moral, if that's how they're thinking)? I shake my head.
I found this page. It's not obscene. It's a brief interview with someone who makes porn. I thought his point of view might contribute to the discussion.
http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2011/07/27/porn/index.html (http://www.salon.com/life/feature/2011/07/27/porn/index.html)
He looks wasted, the life-style show in his face. Not impressed but digustated.
Kate D
No one should be impressed. It's meant to be informative.
Interesting article, and I know the bar all too well.
The woman who wrote the article has a weekly column at Salon.com. She described going to some kind of live sex show once and made it sound as ordinary as a day at the mall.
For many people it is. SF is the most openly kinky place in the world. Lots of events, a few of them very public, and one, an outdoor fair several blocks long.
My original reason to bring this debate on was from an article that stated that hard core pornography ( called GNOS? for some reason) was destroying male desire for 'normal' sexual relationships with females. the males were too turned on by the images to respond in a 'normal' way to their female partners desire.
OK lots of holes here ( :embarrassed:). Sexual thoughts has been part of sexuality for ever. Trying not to sound too dumb 97% of male and 65% masturbate regularly. There is a massive break down in age as expected ( I will not give refs but follow ups from Kinselly's flawed study).
But masturbation does not lower male sex desire, It often increases it. "I saw a women wearing sexy lingerie and had wank, I come home and you are wearing the same" So I thought having a cold shower and a game of golf was needed; or " I just want to make passionate love to you"
But where the article was coming from was if my male partner prefers wanking to porn what do I do?
He sees me as the chick in the flick, He no longer makes love to me, he wanks in my vagina, I'm porn.
So how do we deal with this?
Ciny
Are you saying that he can't differentiate between movies and reality? Or that its easy to dismiss people who really don't have much of a personality to begin with?
Quote from: tekla on July 29, 2011, 08:14:45 AM
Are you saying that he can't differentiate between movies and reality? Or that its easy to dismiss people who really don't have much of a personality to begin with?
My original question is obvious. And has been ignored, as usual. Which is what i expected.
Read my post, apologies you may need to think. oh ->-bleeped-<- the t word
Entertaining though
Cindy
Well in fairness the OP was rambling and confusing and often wrong.
To wit:I do think that Western society has got more violent and that one of the reasons is the depiction of violence in TV, movies etc.
There are two unsupported claims in that, first that Western society has become more violent, which is not born out by statistical evidence. And that that the causes of that lay in media and not behavior.
Pretty sure society is allot less violent and safer than in previous centuries.
At least I don't have to worry about the next village over sending 1000 polearm weilding thugs to steal our harvests.
Less violent then even 20-30 years ago.
Quote from: Cindy James on July 29, 2011, 06:02:02 AM
My original reason to bring this debate on was from an article that stated that hard core pornography ( called GNOS? for some reason) was destroying male desire for 'normal' sexual relationships with females. the males were too turned on by the images to respond in a 'normal' way to their female partners desire.
There is some interesting stuff about this in the book 'Affluenza' by Oliver James.