Pornography

[Scheherazade]

What a way to start off the new week!

The poll is anonymous so no one can see your answer.

Please answer truthfully.

[MarkBastable]

So why are the 'I don't' answers justified with a 'because' and the 'I do' answers aren't?

[Pierre Menard]

Man and regularly.

I probably masturbate once a day on average, porn is just an easy way to get aroused (single at the moment) and makes it slightly more enjoyable then simply laying there with junk in hand.

I'm smart enough to know it doesn't correlate to reality (although I do watch amateur stuff the vast majority of the time). It's purely a utilitarian tool that makes releasing a bit of sexual buildup throughout a day slightly more enjoyable.

[cacian]

Great thread Scher I have voted.
Porn is not for me and I am not for it I guess but I from what I have seen I can easily say that porn is not geared towards women but more for men.
I might be wrong though.

[Scheherazade]

So why are the 'I don't' answers justified with a 'because' and the 'I do' answers aren't?Is a justification needed for "I do" options?

[MarkBastable]

Is a justification needed for "I do" options?

Is it needed for the 'I don't' options?

[AuntShecky]

Let me be "frank." (No, that doesn't mean I want to have a sex change operation.)

You know, it is virtually impossible to talk or write about pornography without unwittingly stepping into the danger zone of the double entendre! So be forewarned. But I will try to be sensitive.

If I've ever watched pornography, it was inadvertent. Unlike the Supreme Court Justice with his famous declaration, I'm not sure I know when I see it! But I'm sure as hell not looking for it. Even so, you know I've got opinions on the topic. That's the American way.

On the occasions when I might have witnessed pornographic material, it could have been part of a movie that I had chosen to watch for other reasons. For instance, I thought that Quills, the film about the Marquis de Sade, was worthwhile, even though it was about civilization's most notorious pornographer. (Come to think of it, that movie didn't have many scenes full of blatant obscenity or "perversity", but the characters surely talked a lot about it.)

As a rule, I avoid pornography. The first reason is that I don't believe my "prurient" interest is all that active, maybe attributable to my gender and , alas, my age. I still have curiosity just about everything --at least I hope so-- but pornography isn't high up there on the list.

Secondly, what I heard about pornography -- its subject matter as well as its "motifs" (if you could call them that)-- is that it seems to me it's very, very boring and despite the so-called "variations," repetitive -- the same old, same old over and over again. I can't imagine that there are endless ways to show the same basic act, with the same, if you will, "climax." The audience already knows pretty much how the story is going to end!

If the porno movie happens to go out of its way not to take itself seriously, beyond the aspect of "camp," then it becomes quasi-pornographic, a parody -- and thus its intentions are different from "real" pornography. If people actually read the earnestly icky epistles in the in Penthouse "Forum," they must have read them strictly for laughs.

And last, there are reasons of "taste." (I hate using the word in this context because it connotes primness or prudery.) But I really don't have a taste for what tends to denigrate women. To be clear, it doesn't matter one damn bit if the porno actress "wants" to do it or if she "enjoys" it or sees it as a way to earn a living. Beyond the individual female or females in a particular film, what kind of message does exploitation send out to the world at large, to healthy heterosexual males, especially young men, and to a woman's sense of self-worth? Underlying pornography is the message that a woman can be objectified to the extent that her unique personality and value as a human being have been obliterated in favor of her sexual availabilty, and subsequent dispensibility. This objection to pornography has little to do with "morality," but everything to do with equality.

A few years ago I read that researchers found that because of the prevalence and availability of pornography, especially via the Web, young men are demanding "more" from their girlfriends because of the extremely graphic movies and on-line videos they had seen. Imagine the kinds of pressure this puts on young women, not to mention the effect these demands might have on the quality of a person's healthy and happy sexual life. The late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan often bewailed about "deviance defined down," and though he had used the phrase to refer to society at large, it certainly applies to pornography.

Please don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about censorship-- that's a whole other issue. In fact, if you want to rot your brains looking at pornography all day, go right ahead. (But you might want to wash your hands afterward.)

[Delta40]

How come the poll doesn't include pornographic literature? What about all those who don't watch porn but get off reading it?

[Shevek]

And last, there are reasons of "taste." (I hate using the word in this context because it connotes primness or prudery.) But I really don't have a taste for what tends to denigrate women. To be clear, it doesn't matter one damn bit if the porno actress "wants" to do it or if she "enjoys" it or sees it as a way to earn a living. Beyond the individual female or females in a particular film, what kind of message does exploitation send out to the world at large, to healthy heterosexual males, especially young men, and to a woman's sense of self-worth? Underlying pornography is the message that a woman can be objectified to the extent that her unique personality and value as a human being have been obliterated in favor of her sexual availabilty, and subsequent dispensibility. This objection to pornography has little to do with "morality," but everything to do with equality.

A few years ago I read that researchers found that because of the prevalence and availability of pornography, especially via the Web, young men are demanding "more" from their girlfriends because of the extremely graphic movies and on-line videos they had seen. Imagine the kinds of pressure this puts on young women, not to mention the effect these demands might have on the quality of a person's healthy and happy sexual life. The late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan often bewailed about "defiance defined down," and though he had used the phrase to refer to society at large, it certainly applies to pornography.


This assumes that porn is something only straight men enjoy at the expense of women. I think the issue of sexual equality as it is represented in porn is quite a bit more complex than the scenario you present in which a "healthy" heterosexual man (I don't know why you bring up healthiness?) reproduces denigrating acts on their female partners because they saw it in a video. Gay men, gay women, and straight women also enjoy porn. Is gay porn exploitive in the same way? I understand that the porn industry in general is directed towards a straight male audience, but I don't know whether your objection holds in the context of other kinds of porn, which suggests to me that the issue is about the dominant cultural expectations about sexuality placed on men and women rather than just porn videos.

[MarkBastable]

The late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan often bewailed about "deviance defined down," and though he had used the phrase to refer to society at large, it certainly applies to pornography.


Deviance isn't about some kind of ladderscale, as if deviances piled on top of each other to reach an apex of deviance. It's not a moral thing, that has a hierarchy (even an inverted one).

Deviance is about breadth - the characteristic of deviance is that it's measured relative to a norm that is narrower than the potential field of activity. Activities you consider normal, another culture or another era might consider deviant. There's no moral aspect to that. It can't be 'defined down'.

And even if it were, surely Moynihan meant 'defined up' - in other words, he felt that deviance, by definition, was becoming harder and harder to achieve, on account of so many things that used to be considered deviant now being taken as part of the norm. The bar for deviance was higher than it used to be....

See, the more one talks about it, the more ill-conceived the phrase becomes...

[billl]

So why are the 'I don't' answers justified with a 'because' and the 'I do' answers aren't?

Yeah, and what about me? I never watch porn, but I feel the need.

[Scheherazade]

Is it needed for the 'I don't' options?The refusal to watch porn needs to be justified surely, does it not?


How come the poll doesn't include pornographic literature? What about all those who don't watch porn but get off reading it?This poll is aimed towards pornographic movies only, following the discussion in another thread. I was simply curious to see how many of us tend to watch porn or avoid doing so and why.

We can have another thread discussing erotica as well if you would like.


Yeah, and what about me? I never watch porn, but I feel the need.I do apologise for overlooking your unique stand on this issue, Billl. I will amend the poll accordingly now.

[billl]

Thank you, my voice is heard.

[tonywalt]

A few years ago I read that researchers found that because of the prevalence and availability of pornography, especially via the Web, young men are demanding "more" from their girlfriends because of the extremely graphic movies and on-line videos they had seen. Imagine the kinds of pressure this puts on young women, not to mention the effect these demands might have on the quality of a person's healthy and happy sexual life.

Fair point and I don't disagree. I can see your point as to how it could negatively effect a Relationship.

Have any women in a serious Relationship with a man had negative experience because their male partner watched porn?

[cacian]

Fair point and I don't disagree. I can see your point as to how it could negatively effect a Relationship.

Have any women in a serious Relationship with a man had negative experience because their male partner watched porn?

Well it is double standards. If you are in a relationship then I am guessing lots will be hacked off about their partners watching porn without their knowledge. Let's face it the computer makes it so easy to have whatever sex in one's mind and so people are easily swayed into it because they have a computer at home.
Someone who watches porn without the knowledge of their partners says something about the relationship.

[mona amon]

Fair point and I don't disagree. I can see your point as to how it could negatively effect a Relationship.

Have any women in a serious Relationship with a man had negative experience because their male partner watched porn?

I'm thinking (or hoping) that in most cases guys are rational enough to separate porn from reality and not have such expectations from their partners, just as most girls are reasonable enough not to expect their real life boyfriends or husbands to be as successful, thoughtful, sensitive, caring and sexy as the heroes of popular romantic fiction. :)

[tonywalt]

I think that there is a strong 'dominant male and submissive female' component to alot of mainstram pornography- to much in my opinion. That said and much to my surprise and sometimes shock - women are much more explorational in this area. I'd say it's in the top 5 surprises of Life. Again, just to clarify, I am speaking of pornography's effect on sex lives ONLY, NOT getting into to treatment of women in workplace, etc.



Anyone?

[Scheherazade]

I have to admit that I was expecting to see more women picking the "on moral grounds" option.

(Yes, that was my gender bias.)

[B. Laumness]

I have no need of it since I found a woman who is more interesting than that.

[tonywalt]

I have no need of it since I found a woman who is more interesting than that.

Yea, that's typical - once a guy is in a relationship we just don't want to involve ourselves in this sort of filth:angel:

[Emil Miller]

Yea, that's typical - once a guy is in a relationship we just don't want to involve ourselves in this sort of filth:angel:

I don't think he mentioned filth, but in this case he's right because the woman he's referring to is a sweetheart.

[cacian]

I have to admit that I was expecting to see more women picking the "on moral grounds" option.

(Yes, that was my gender bias.)

I think morality is a myth. Nothing gets done under morality only what feels right at the spur of the moment.

[blazeofglory]

The Pornographic stuff - to say it good or bad or moral or immoral is only a matter of attitude. This is the expression of the body and the act and what s wrong if people watch is aesthetically. not disdainfully or amorally. Animals do it and they are bare do it instinctively and impulsively and man intellectualizes it too much and gives it the unneeded thought. Let everybody watch and to be critically of it is nonsense. In my part of the world this is totally tabooed and I am speaking from my own cultural and social lens. It may not match with the values and norms believed and lived in different social settings. It is as naturally as watching a flowing river and the act is like diving into it, and to go with the tide.

The problem is not with this but with the rationalization of it

[E.A Rumfield]

I am a man, I masturbate maybe 5-8 times a week. Do I sometimes feel it is unhealthy, sure maybe I should do it less often but I don't think masturbating is wrong in anyway. It is natural, if you don't you are unnatural. If I couldn't jerk off I'd probably go crazy. Porn is a different subject. I feel watching pornography is shameful sometimes, especially how disgustingly unnatural it is. Sex isn't like that and as I grew up I actually had to learn that. So I do think porn is bad in a way especially since it's so easily accessible and I know as a kid I couldn't get enough. For a married couple it is probably pretty helpful in spicing things up. Like all things in life it is falls somewhere in the middle.

[E.A Rumfield]

Yea, that's typical - once a guy is in a relationship we just don't want to involve ourselves in this sort of filth:angel:

Yea right what is this guy talking about.

Different subject but I don't think men really masturbate more than women, some dudes do it too much and some chicks do also, while some probably don't do it often enough and some like that little bear in that story do it just the right amount of times.

[blazeofglory]

It is an attitudinal idea and if somebody enjoys it to be judgmental is pointless

[E.A Rumfield]

It is an attitudinal idea and if somebody enjoys it to be judgmental is pointless

It's evolutionary. Tons of animals masturbate. What's there to judge. It's like thinking it's wrong to make a bowel movement. Then you get all clogged up and that's no good.

[blazeofglory]

It's evolutionary.

I did not say it is not

[ftil]

I think morality is a myth. Nothing gets done under morality only what feels right at the spur of the moment.

Hmm…it reminds me about Aleister Crowley, occultist and magician, and his famous quote “ Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law”. It didn’t worked for him as he ended as a heroin addict and bankrupt, destroying life of a number of people.

I have never heard that morality is a myth. :lol: Of course, it depends what we mean when we say morality. Shouldn’t freedom, dignity, truth , beauty, and love be of the highest values?

[MorpheusSandman]

Man. Regular. I try to masturbate at least once a day for health reasons as, believe it or not, there are some days I'm too busy and/or don't feel like it.

Personally, I'm more interested in erotica than pornography, though the difference between them is ambiguous. To me, erotica is work that features sex strongly but has other significant components to it, whether it's thematic or aesthetic or whatever. Films like E Tu Mama Tambien, Last Tango in Paris, 36 Fillette, In the Realm of the Senses, and others are good examples of what I'm talking about, or maybe even Lost Girls in comics (as Alan Moore said, anything that can be done can be done well, and that goes for porn). To me, depictions of sex are just more interesting when there are emotions or ideas or something else attached to it. Straight pornography tends to bore me because it's mechanical and lacks that sensuality that you get when you're with someone you actually care about. About as pornographic as I get are websites like Met-Art and Sex-Art, that at least have good photographers, cinematographers, and directors that aren't afraid to get conceptual and even a bit weird (like with body-painting).

FWIW, most of the negative attitudes towards pornography and masturbation are born out of fear, ignorance, and even dishonesty. No study has ever shown that masturbation is the slight bit harmful and, as a matter of fact, the opposite has been shown, as it helps relieves stress, tension, and even helps prevents prostate cancer in men. Likewise with pornography, most of the pseudo-feminist objections don't really hold water with the facts of the industry, its viewers, or reality itself. To say that porn "degrades" women or "objectifies them" actually feeds into the actual misogynistic ideas that women should remain "clean" and "pure" and that them having sex makes them "sluts" and "objects" etc. The irony is that women are probably more frequently shown in positions of power in popular pornography; the idea of the submissive women is almost becoming antiquated in an era where we've seen an explosion in powerful, in control, heroic females both in fiction and reality. The thing about objectification is that it's only a negative if a person can't see the other sex as anything but objects. When either sex is physically attracted to the other there is a component of objectification there, but it's only a problem if it never gets past that. The whole reason most porn tries to have storylines is because people tend to get more turned on if they feel they have some connection with the star/character that's beyond JUST the physical.

[cacian]

Hmm…it reminds me about Aleister Crowley, occultist and magician, and his famous quote “ Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law”. It didn’t worked for him as he ended as a heroin addict and bankrupt, destroying life of a number of people.

I have never heard that morality is a myth. :lol: Of course, it depends what we mean when we say morality. Shouldn’t freedom, dignity, truth , beauty, and love be of the highest values?

Of course values and whatever else look very good in books and even better sound preached but the fact of the matter people are a different. Morality sets out to examplify things that people frankly ignore. I do not believe anyone truly act on morality but only on intuition and what feels right for them there and then.
A person is correct or good because that is what makes them feel right they are comfortable with it. They are who they are not because morality says so it is because it is already within them.
I personally only act on what I think is right for me and not what others preach.
I act independently and decide for myself so long as no other around me is hurt of course I shall carry on in the same way.
Morality has never done anything for me and never will.
And so to go to back to the topic of pornography I do not see why I should refrain from viewing it on grounds of morality. I will treat it in the same way as I treat other things and that is with thoughts and consideration.
I will think about it and make a judgement and if I think it is not for me then I am happy with it I shan't need a second opinion on it.
Morality has nothing to do with it and so yes for it is a myth with no true foundation to it. People will remain true to themselves and morality would have served no role whatsoever in the making of a human being.

[Scheherazade]

Morality has never done anything for me and never will."Ask not what morality can do for you. Ask what you can do for morality."

[cacian]

"Ask not what morality can do for you. Ask what you can do for morality."

Ah morality if only it had ears!! what would we say and what would we not? That is the question.

[stlukesguild]

Personally, I'm more interested in erotica than pornography, though the difference between them is ambiguous. To me, erotica is work that features sex strongly but has other significant components to it, whether it's thematic or aesthetic or whatever.

The question I have here is where do we draw the line between "erotica" and "pornography". Commonly, you hear the argument that the difference lies in the lack of aesthetic merit in pornography... but we wouldn't apply this to any other genre. There is no suggestion really bad science fiction or romance novels are a wholly different genre but there is this attempt to divide art with a largely sexual content into the "erotic" and the "pornographic"... either on aesthetic grounds or moral grounds... and I'm not certain that either approach makes sense except for us as individuals. There are certainly a great many things that I prefer not to read or look at or listen to on aesthetic or moral grounds... and many of these have nothing whatsoever to do with sex or eroticism... but I balk at the idea of imposing my aesthetic or moral standards on others. It seems that when sex enters into the equation there are a great many who assume the right to dictate to others.

[cacian]

Personally, I'm more interested in erotica than pornography, though the difference between them is ambiguous. To me, erotica is work that features sex strongly but has other significant components to it, whether it's thematic or aesthetic or whatever.

I had it erotic was all in the mind a metal sexual stimulus. It is more of visual satisfaction then physical one. One find leather and strapping erotic but does not mean there is going to a physical act that involves sex per say. I might be totally wrong but that the impression I got from going to erotic events. I have to say I did not like it in the sense that it terrified me more then actually interested me. It was a real eye opener a world I never knew existed.

[MorpheusSandman]

The question I have here is where do we draw the line between "erotica" and "pornography".There is no line, there's a spectrum. Whatever the difficulty in precise classification, there's a very clear difference between a film like In the Realm of the Senses and the "films" of, say, The Bang Brothers. That they both feature explicit sex is no more reason to suggest they belong to the same genre than it is to say True Lies and The Godfather belong to the same genre because they feature guns and killing. For me, the question isn't one of aesthetic merit, per say, but for what purpose the sex is serving and how many other elements are brought into the equation. If the sex is only there to get its viewers off, then it's pornographic; if the sex is merely a part of a larger context, then it's erotica. No, there's no clean split in that distinction, but does there need to be?

You say that we don't have this in other genres, but I actually think we do. Artists have been mixing and experimenting with genre definitions for ages--remember the whole "tragical-comical-historical-pastoral" bit in Hamlet? Even in something as straight-forward as sci-fi you have sub-divisions and hardcore fans squabbling over the distinction of hard and soft sci-fi, or whether something would be more properly categorized as fantasy (Star Wars is a good example of something that's superficially sci-fi, but really plays entirely with classic fantasy archetypes). The distinction between erotica and pornography isn't all that different from the distinction between fantasy and hard sci-fi, really. It has to do with how strongly a presence the defining attributes have, and what role they take on.


I had it erotic was all the mind a metal sexual stimulus. "Metal" sexual stimulus has to be one of the better Freudian slips in this thread. ;) Anyways, I do think you're right that erotica does tend to have a much stronger mental component because of how much more it relies on suggestion. I keep going back to In the Realm of the Senses, but it's a good example of explicit sex finding its way into a film that clearly has more on its mind than the mere physical, titillating nature of the sex itself, as something like those surrealistic dream scenes would never be found in actual pornography.

[B. Laumness]

I believe in the pleasures of Eros, god of love, in sensuality and eroticism, but it seems the tendency is to think: porn = masturbation, porn = sex, against porn = against sex and masturbation. That is silly. That reveals a big confusion. In front of such a mental confusion, the first thing to reply is: when you watch porn, you are a viewer, you don't have sex with a real partner — let alone the fact that many amateur couples show their intercourse in video, which seems to me contrary to the act of love, which should remain intimate. Second, if you need porn in order to fulfill a solitary pleasure, you probably lack imagination, and, worst than that, your libido is certainly weak, for you need an expedient to be aroused whereas you should be able to be excited in a more simple and natural way — in other terms, listening to one's desires without such an expedient brings more pleasure, more easily and maybe more frequently. Third, if you think watching porn regularly is healthy, you should try to make love more often and see the difference between what is really good and what is a poor ersatz that often distorts reality in a twisted and brutal manner. You can notice that the word love is less and less used. In the future, the reality of love will be lost. Soon, all the people will think that what is depicted in porn is the normal way to have sexual relationships, and they will be satisfied to stay alone in front of their images, without human warmth; the best they will get is sex partners, without deep connection with them, like merchandises: they won't have a lover. In many fields, the work of the two past centuries has consisted in making people forget the sense of nature; and now we have reached a point where what is abnormal is said normal — the first abnormality is to talk about all those intimate things publicly, to say (even if this is anonymous): "I do this a certain amount of times, etc." It reminds me a remark by Karl Lagerfeld, that I heard more than ten years ago; he said: "Times have changed; now, in the dinners, I can hear women talk about the size of the penis with crude words, their preferences, etc." This is called "liberation of women" and "freedom of love". Not sure that love is the winner in this affair. Not sure that women are now more respected; actually, they are treated more and more like objects. Nobody will make me believe that a woman who performs hardcore things without love, whose head is maintained in such a way that she can barely breathe and is about to cry and suffocate in doing something that should be done and received with pleasure, is not degraded in her dignity. Respect for women goes along with a sense of sacredness for sex; and there is no beauty of love and no equality between lovers without these sacred emotions. The poll of that thread shows that most watch porn, and that few can live without it; and these latter are seen like reactionary idiots or despicable hypocrits or even asexual beings. Above all, it shows that in today's world most people do not share love with someone.

[lilimarlene]

Fair point and I don't disagree. I can see your point as to how it could negatively effect a Relationship.

Have any women in a serious Relationship with a man had negative experience because their male partner watched porn?

I'm quite open minded in this area so I don't have a problem with it. I assume most men watch porno and frankly I do too. I have had long term relationships and we would watch movies together. It had no negative impact whatsoever on the relationships, in fact for me it was the opposite, it would spice things up. The problem probably comes when partners can't speak openly with each other about what turns them on and enjoy, or they are with someone that is more sexually conservative or has a lower sex drive, so maybe they turn to porn for their fix. So it wouldn't bother me that someone I was seriously involved with watched porn on their own from time to time. The problem would arise if they preferred watching porn on their own than doing the real thing with me.

[Calidore]

"Metal" sexual stimulus has to be one of the better Freudian slips in this thread.

See: Steely Dan :)


Anyways, I do think you're right that erotica does tend to have a much stronger mental component because of how much more it relies on suggestion. I keep going back to In the Realm of the Senses, but it's a good example of explicit sex finding its way into a film that clearly has more on its mind than the mere physical, titillating nature of the sex itself, as something like those surrealistic dream scenes would never be found in actual pornography.

I don't think the sex in ITROTS was intended to be titillating in the least. That was a movie about an obsessive, destructive relationship, with cold and detached sex between two self-absorbed people using each other as sex toys.

[ftil]

Of course values and whatever else look very good in books and even better sound preached but the fact of the matter people are a different. Morality sets out to examplify things that people frankly ignore. I do not believe anyone truly act on morality but only on intuition and what feels right for them there and then.
A person is correct or good because that is what makes them feel right they are comfortable with it. They are who they are not because morality says so it is because it is already within them.
I personally only act on what I think is right for me and not what others preach.
I act independently and decide for myself so long as no other around me is hurt of course I shall carry on in the same way.
Morality has never done anything for me and never will.
And so to go to back to the topic of pornography I do not see why I should refrain from viewing it on grounds of morality. I will treat it in the same way as I treat other things and that is with thoughts and consideration.
I will think about it and make a judgement and if I think it is not for me then I am happy with it I shan't need a second opinion on it.
Morality has nothing to do with it and so yes for it is a myth with no true foundation to it. People will remain true to themselves and morality would have served no role whatsoever in the making of a human being.



Hmm…......it is not wise to act upon what feels right or to apply Crowley’s law. Killer may say that it felt right to kill somebody. Thief may say that if felt right to feel a thrill and excitement to robber a bank. Rapist may say that it felt right to rape a woman. Do you see how dangerous your thinking is?

Don’t you think that people have minds for a reason? Well, it is New age brainwashing to give up thinking and rational mind and to do what we feel is right for us or what resonates with us. It means total mental emptiness and inactivity. Scary!

Again, you didn’t clarify what you mean by morality. I defined my definition of morality that involves freedom, truth, dignity, beauty, and love.

[stlukesguild]

There is no line, there's a spectrum.

And that creates a problem when people bandy about terms such as "erotica" and "pornography" without clearly defining either or spelling out what makes them different. Ultimately, one man's "pornography" is another man's "erotica".

Whatever the difficulty in precise classification, there's a very clear difference between a film like In the Realm of the Senses and the "films" of, say, The Bang Brothers. That they both feature explicit sex is no more reason to suggest they belong to the same genre than it is to say True Lies and The Godfather belong to the same genre because they feature guns and killing. For me, the question isn't one of aesthetic merit, per say, but for what purpose the sex is serving and how many other elements are brought into the equation. If the sex is only there to get its viewers off, then it's pornographic; if the sex is merely a part of a larger context, then it's erotica.

Of course a film like In the Realm of the Senses has goals other than to titillate or sexually arouse the audience... which is all that a trashy Bang Brothers video is... but you are comparing two examples at the far opposite ends of the spectrum. The differences are not always so clear:

Is this "pornographic"?

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8482/8254158776_7ed9f61d89_m.jpg (http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8482/8254158776_7ed9f61d89_b.jpg)

Mark Twain though so.

But what of this?

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7125/8165884071_4f401e0e43_m.jpg (http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7125/8165884071_4f401e0e43_b.jpg)

or this?

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8483/8170585606_60b3f3fb8f_m.jpg (http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8483/8170585606_60b3f3fb8f_z.jpg)

or this?

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7272/8165902980_ffc3afe0c8_m.jpg (http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7272/8165902980_ffc3afe0c8_b.jpg)

How do these differ from this?

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8485/8254174164_9d447697e6_m.jpg (http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8485/8254174164_9d447697e6_b.jpg)

... or from a Playboy Centerfold?

You mentioned SexArt which offers pornographic videos that employ a degree of sensitivity to cinematography, photography, costume, etc... In other words, there is a concern for the aesthetics. It seems that here is where the line between "erotica" and "pornography" gets blurry

No, there's no clean split in that distinction, but does there need to be?

Again... without a clear definition we have individuals bandying about terms like "pornography" and making sweeping value judgments without clarifying what they are talking about. Considering some members responses to paintings by Gustav Klimt and Egon Schiele I suspect that some of us have very different notions as to what is or is not pornographic.

You say that we don't have this in other genres, but I actually think we do. Artists have been mixing and experimenting with genre definitions for ages--remember the whole "tragical-comical-historical-pastoral" bit in Hamlet?

I wasn't talking about blurring the edges between two distinct and respected genre... because that is the problem with the term "pornography"... it infers something obscene... lacking any aesthetic or artist merit... and where that may perfectly describe a Bang Brothers video, does it accurately describe the Titian or Modigliani... or even the centerfold?

[stlukesguild]

I believe in the pleasures of Eros, god of love, in sensuality and eroticism, but it seems the tendency is to think: porn = masturbation, porn = sex, against porn = against sex and masturbation. That is silly.

Perhaps... but it is no less absurd to suggest that those who are for pornography... or even just against censorship... are inherently against women and in support of abuse, addiction, and manipulation.

That reveals a big confusion. In front of such a mental confusion, the first thing to reply is: when you watch porn, you are a viewer, you don't have sex with a real partner — let alone the fact that many amateur couples show their intercourse in video, which seems to me contrary to the act of love, which should remain intimate.

Of course there are couples who watch pornography together. I know one couple who go to the strip clubs together. I personally agree that lovemaking is something intimate that I would not wish to share with others... but I'm not willing to impose my values upon others. There are couples who are into exhibitionism... whether filming themselves or having sex in front of others. There are also couples who are into having sex with others, having sex with another person in front of their partner, etc...

Second, if you need porn in order to fulfill a solitary pleasure, you probably lack imagination, and, worst than that, your libido is certainly weak, for you need an expedient to be aroused whereas you should be able to be excited in a more simple and natural way — in other terms, listening to one's desires without such an expedient brings more pleasure, more easily and maybe more frequently.

Men are very much visually aroused... whether the stimuli be a painting, a photograph, a film, a woman walking down the street, or the sight of their lover. I question just what is or is not "natural" when it comes to human sexuality.

Third, if you think watching porn regularly is healthy, you should try to make love more often and see the difference between what is really good and what is a poor ersatz that often distorts reality in a twisted and brutal manner.

I doubt anyone would argue that pornography is preferable to "real sex". Undoubtedly, as in any realm of fantasy, it offers a distortion of reality... but one that any intelligent person should be able to recognize as a distortion.

You can notice that the word love is less and less used.

Love and sex are ever intertwined... but certainly one can have sex without love... although ultimately you may find that unfulfilling.

In the future, the reality of love will be lost. Soon, all the people will think that what is depicted in porn is the normal way to have sexual relationships, and they will be satisfied to stay alone in front of their images, without human warmth;

I don't know if I'd go that far. We've had erotic images and words and even music for millennium... and it hasn't destroyed our need for true human contact.

...the best they will get is sex partners, without deep connection with them, like merchandises: they won't have a lover.

Again... I'm not going to offer up judgment of the sexual behavior of others.

In many fields, the work of the two past centuries has consisted in making people forget the sense of nature; and now we have reached a point where what is abnormal is said normal — the first abnormality is to talk about all those intimate things publicly, to say (even if this is anonymous): "I do this a certain amount of times, etc."

Again... how do we define what is or is not "natural" when it comes to human sexuality? What is common today is far different from what was accepted in the Victorian age. We might be quite shocked at the attitudes toward sexuality common in the Middle Ages or classical Rome. I'm not certain that the modesty or constraints of other time and other places was inherently better. It led to issues of shame, timidity, a lack of communication with one's lover, a fear of broaching certain subjects... even with a doctor... and often led to judgmental attitudes toward others who were deemed blemished or disgraced... ala Hawthorne's Scarlet Letter.

It reminds me a remark by Karl Lagerfeld, that I heard more than ten years ago; he said: "Times have changed; now, in the dinners, I can hear women talk about the size of the penis with crude words, their preferences, etc." This is called "liberation of women" and "freedom of love". Not sure that love is the winner in this affair.

On the other hand, do we return to a Victorian ideal of the virginal woman who must appear meek and mild and without blemish... let alone any sexual thoughts or desires?

Not sure that women are now more respected; actually, they are treated more and more like objects. Nobody will make me believe that a woman who performs hardcore things without love, whose head is maintained in such a way that she can barely breathe and is about to cry and suffocate in doing something that should be done and received with pleasure, is not degraded in her dignity.

I would assume that it would be next to impossible to maintain one's dignity under such circumstances... of course if we were to view ourselves in our most intimate moments, I suspect we would be forced to admit that there is a certain lack of dignity... if not a comic element involved.

[mona amon]

Pornography vs erotica - I'd say Erotica is a branch of pornography rather than something separate from it. It is that part of pornography that has artistic or literary qualities - artistic pornography in short.

Edit: Classifying something as erotica will involve two subjective evaluations - is this work pornographic? and does it have artistic qualities?

[MorpheusSandman]

See: Steely Dan I agree that band is quite pornographic. ;)


I don't think the sex in ITROTS was intended to be titillating in the least. That was a movie about an obsessive, destructive relationship, with cold and detached sex between two self-absorbed people using each other as sex toys.I very much agree with this, but that’s the point that explicit sex can be used for very different purposes and ends, so lumping any such depiction under one label doesn’t make sense. I would also add that there’s a very, very strong sociological (as well as psychological) component to ITROTS. The depiction of self-destructive sex is used to parallel the depiction of self-destructive nationalism. Oshima is presenting a society that is praising militaristic nationalism while condemning sex (outlawing pornography and prostitution), while subtly suggesting that there’s ultimately no difference in the extremes.


And that creates a problem when people bandy about terms such as "erotica" and "pornography" without clearly defining either or spelling out what makes them different… without a clear definition we have individuals bandying about terms like "pornography" and making sweeping value judgments without clarifying what they are talking about… that is the problem with the term "pornography"... it infers something obscene... lacking any aesthetic or artist merit. Well, this issue presents a general problem with the relationship of language and human cognition, in general. In categorizing spectrums, we usually find ourselves splitting between poles, with perhaps a hybrid “middle” ground, with connotations frequently slipping in. Personally, I just view such things extensionally, ie, descriptions about what the external object actually is, as opposed to bringing things like moral judgments into the equations. Something like “pornography as offensive depictions of sexuality” isn’t a useful label to help us identify pornography because of how much it relies on subjectivity. All labels that combine the externally descriptive with the subjective reactions to that object can’t be resolved in any universally acceptable fashion, and it would be futile to try. However, pornography as a label describing the quantity, type, and purpose of sex being displayed can be much more objective, even though there will be grey areas. However, there’s no real way around those grey areas without either creating new labels or hybrid labels. Something like SexArt is a good example of a site that has all the features of traditional pornography, but with extra sensitivity to cinematography, direction, costume, music, concept, etc., and because we don’t really have a precise word to describe that mixture, we tend to make do with either pornography or erotica, or maybe erotic pornography.

I don’t want to get too wordy or technical here, but Eliezer Yudkowsky has a superb sequence of articles on this subject on LessWrong.com: http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/A_Human%27s_Guide_to_Words

In relation to this subject specifically, I’d recommend:
http://lesswrong.com/lw/nj/similarity_clusters/
http://lesswrong.com/lw/nl/the_cluster_structure_of_thingspace/
http://lesswrong.com/lw/np/disputing_definitions/
http://lesswrong.com/lw/ny/sneaking_in_connotations/
http://lesswrong.com/lw/o0/where_to_draw_the_boundary/

Really, you can just swap out most of his examples with “erotica,” “pornography,” and their trademark components and qualities.


I doubt anyone would argue that pornography is preferable to "real sex". Undoubtedly, as in any realm of fantasy, it offers a distortion of reality... but one that any intelligent person should be able to recognize as a distortion.Is fantasy more a distortion of reality or a depiction of our own distorted views of reality? That’s part of the issue; none of us sees reality as it is and nothing more, the “plain sense of things” in Stevens’ phrase.

[B. Laumness]

I believe in the pleasures of Eros, god of love, in sensuality and eroticism, but it seems the tendency is to think: porn = masturbation, porn = sex, against porn = against sex and masturbation. That is silly.

Perhaps... but it is no less absurd to suggest that those who are for pornography... or even just against censorship... are inherently against women and in support of abuse, addiction, and manipulation.

That reveals a big confusion. In front of such a mental confusion, the first thing to reply is: when you watch porn, you are a viewer, you don't have sex with a real partner — let alone the fact that many amateur couples show their intercourse in video, which seems to me contrary to the act of love, which should remain intimate.

Of course there are couples who watch pornography together. I know one couple who go to the strip clubs together. I personally agree that lovemaking is something intimate that I would not wish to share with others... but I'm not willing to impose my values upon others. There are couples who are into exhibitionism... whether filming themselves or having sex in front of others. There are also couples who are into having sex with others, having sex with another person in front of their partner, etc...

Second, if you need porn in order to fulfill a solitary pleasure, you probably lack imagination, and, worst than that, your libido is certainly weak, for you need an expedient to be aroused whereas you should be able to be excited in a more simple and natural way — in other terms, listening to one's desires without such an expedient brings more pleasure, more easily and maybe more frequently.

Men are very much visually aroused... whether the stimuli be a painting, a photograph, a film, a woman walking down the street, or the sight of their lover. I question just what is or is not "natural" when it comes to human sexuality.

Third, if you think watching porn regularly is healthy, you should try to make love more often and see the difference between what is really good and what is a poor ersatz that often distorts reality in a twisted and brutal manner.

I doubt anyone would argue that pornography is preferable to "real sex". Undoubtedly, as in any realm of fantasy, it offers a distortion of reality... but one that any intelligent person should be able to recognize as a distortion.

You can notice that the word love is less and less used.

Love and sex are ever intertwined... but certainly one can have sex without love... although ultimately you may find that unfulfilling.

In the future, the reality of love will be lost. Soon, all the people will think that what is depicted in porn is the normal way to have sexual relationships, and they will be satisfied to stay alone in front of their images, without human warmth;

I don't know if I'd go that far. We've had erotic images and words and even music for millennium... and it hasn't destroyed our need for true human contact.

...the best they will get is sex partners, without deep connection with them, like merchandises: they won't have a lover.

Again... I'm not going to offer up judgment of the sexual behavior of others.

In many fields, the work of the two past centuries has consisted in making people forget the sense of nature; and now we have reached a point where what is abnormal is said normal — the first abnormality is to talk about all those intimate things publicly, to say (even if this is anonymous): "I do this a certain amount of times, etc."

Again... how do we define what is or is not "natural" when it comes to human sexuality? What is common today is far different from what was accepted in the Victorian age. We might be quite shocked at the attitudes toward sexuality common in the Middle Ages or classical Rome. I'm not certain that the modesty or constraints of other time and other places was inherently better. It led to issues of shame, timidity, a lack of communication with one's lover, a fear of broaching certain subjects... even with a doctor... and often led to judgmental attitudes toward others who were deemed blemished or disgraced... ala Hawthorne's Scarlet Letter.

It reminds me a remark by Karl Lagerfeld, that I heard more than ten years ago; he said: "Times have changed; now, in the dinners, I can hear women talk about the size of the penis with crude words, their preferences, etc." This is called "liberation of women" and "freedom of love". Not sure that love is the winner in this affair.

On the other hand, do we return to a Victorian ideal of the virginal woman who must appear meek and mild and without blemish... let alone any sexual thoughts or desires?

Not sure that women are now more respected; actually, they are treated more and more like objects. Nobody will make me believe that a woman who performs hardcore things without love, whose head is maintained in such a way that she can barely breathe and is about to cry and suffocate in doing something that should be done and received with pleasure, is not degraded in her dignity.

I would assume that it would be next to impossible to maintain one's dignity under such circumstances... of course if we were to view ourselves in our most intimate moments, I suspect we would be forced to admit that there is a certain lack of dignity... if not a comic element involved.

I think that perhaps I have a greater understanding than you have in this area.

[MorpheusSandman]

I think that perhaps I have a greater understanding than you have in this area.That's what you call a solid argument right there, I tell you what.

[ftil]

Originally posted by stlukesguild


Perhaps... but it is no less absurd to suggest that those who are for pornography... or even just against censorship... are inherently against women and in support of abuse, addiction, and manipulation.


Well, people may not be aware what is really going on with porn actresses. People will not know until they do research. Are they support abuse, addiction and manipulation? Absolutely. Being not aware doesn’t change anything. After all, we are talking about adults who watch porn not children. So, it is no absurd to expect from adults to think, ask questions, and research. I understand that teenagers and young adults don’t ask those questions but I don’t see any excuse for older adults.

G. Bruno, renaissance magician and occultist, knew that young adults would be easy subject to being bound.


The degrees of things that can be bound. Children are less bound by their natural feelings, because their nature is absorbed in growth and is disturbed by great changes, and all their nutrition is given over to growth and the structuring of the individual. But they clearly begin to be open to being bound in the fourteenth year, for even though at that age they are still involved in growth, their rate of growth is not as fast and as great as when they were children. And in the stable period of adulthood, men have a greater strength in their semen and, as a result, seem to be more subject to being bound. Furthermore, adolescents and young men seem to be more sexually excited for the reason that they are on fire for a long time because of the novelty of this pleasure; because the passages through which the semen passes are narrower, the wetness gushes forth with a more delightful pleasure. And as a result of the sexual itch which arises from this pressure, they are more delighted and liberated. But bonds are more difficult in older men, whose powers are half dead, whose organs and passages are spent, and whose semen is not abundant. Precisely the same thing is found proportionally in the other emotions which have an analogy or contrast or dependence on the passion of love.
G. Bruno, Cause, Principle, and Unity and Essays on Magic p. 160


So, pornography is addressed to teenagers and young people. Would it affect their ability to build deep and intimate relationships? Absolutely. Would they treat their partner as a sexual object? Absolutely. Would they expect the same performance from their partners as porn actresses’ or actors’? Absolutely. Would watching pornography lead to sexual dysfunction? Absolutely.

So, what will happen to those young people when they reach dreadful 40’s? Not a nice prospect and we shouldn’t be afraid it addresses it.

[JBI]

Originally posted by stlukesguild




Well, people may not be aware what is really going on with porn actresses. People will not know until they do research. Are they support abuse, addiction and manipulation? Absolutely. Being not aware doesn’t change anything. After all, we are talking about adults who watch porn not children. So, it is no absurd to expect from adults to think, ask questions, and research. I understand that teenagers and young adults don’t ask those questions but I don’t see any excuse for older adults.

G. Bruno, renaissance magician and occultist, knew that young adults would be easy subject to being bound.




So, pornography is addressed to teenagers and young people. Would it affect their ability to build deep and intimate relationships? Absolutely. Would they treat their partner as a sexual object? Absolutely. Would they expect the same performance from their partners as porn actresses’ or actors’? Absolutely. Would watching pornography lead to sexual dysfunction? Absolutely.

So, what will happen to those young people when they reach dreadful 40’s? Not a nice prospect and we shouldn’t be afraid it addresses it.

There are drugs and abuse in every level of the workforce, not just porn.

The myth that it is women who are a huge victim is not only a dated assumption, it is also insulting to men.

Have you ever considered the role of the underpaid male porn actor playing beside the woman, or in homosexual work? Have you never considered he is paid less, works just as hard (if not harder) and is victim of the same abuses.

Likewise, have you never considered some women in the field actually like their jobs? and perhaps there are people on the top level who are women? Or maybe they are people who make a good career out of it, and it provides them with a unionized sort of community that gets them out of the cycle of abuse found in occupations like stripping, or even waitressing in low-end joints?

Or perhaps it is merely drug addicted girls who do porn, and need money to support their habit. Well, from what I understand there is a massive lineup of actors of both genders looking to get into the industry. As an agent looking to cash in, anybody would consider the addict as a reluctant choice - people are looking for posterity in the client.


That being said, the largest pornographic producer in the world is not the United States, nor is it Europe. It is Japan, whose industry functions on completely different lines. This sexual object stuff is just dated 1980s propaganda.

The men in the industry are just as privy to the abuse as the women. The women watching porn are just as objectifying as the men (in Asia here, I would say both men and women watch pornography regularly, with the largest consumer per capita in terms of dollars being Korea).

[MorpheusSandman]

All very true, JBI. Most of the negative attitudes towards pornography are dated, and some have never been true to begin with, but merely the product of Puritanical fears being presented as true. One could say much the same for the attitudes towards marijuana. Never underestimate the power of fear and the ensuing negative propaganda.

[blazeofglory]

In fact it is fear alone and nothing else and it does not harm more than the fear of it does

[cacian]

that's what you call a solid argument right there, i tell you what.

lol..

[ftil]

The myth that it is women who are a huge victim is not only a dated assumption, it is also insulting to men.

There is such a vast body of research about violence and abuse of women. Well, it is convenient to deny it.


Have you ever considered the role of the underpaid male porn actor playing beside the woman, or in homosexual work? Have you never considered he is paid less, works just as hard (if not harder) and is victim of the same abuses.

I am a female and I talk about research I have done about women. Why don’t you bring research about men…not your beliefs.


Likewise, have you never considered some women in the field actually like their jobs? and perhaps there are people on the top level who are women? Or maybe they are people who make a good career out of it, and it provides them with a unionized sort of community that gets them out of the cycle of abuse found in occupations like stripping, or even waitressing in low-end joints?

And you know that there are women who enjoy it?
Why don’t you do research what is going in porn business. You may be surprised how high the prevalence of contracting sexual diseases is. Perhaps, you don’t have any clue how sexual diseases damages reproductive organs. It is definitely a reason to enjoy their carrier. :reddevil: Or perhaps, you think that women and men who are in porn business enjoy sex in the front of the camera. What is a smooth sexual intercourse is a result of editing. You can’t enjoy sex with hundreds of stop and cut. Have you ever considered why so many porn actresses use alcohol and drugs and many OD or committed suicide?


But my previous post was not about porn actresses at all. Inconvenient truth, eh?

[cacian]

There is such a vast body of research about violence and abuse of women. Well, it is convenient to deny it.



I am a female and I talk about research I have done about women. Why don’t you bring research about men…not your beliefs.



And you know that there are women who enjoy it?
Why don’t you do research what is going in porn business. You may be surprised how high the prevalence of contracting sexual diseases is. Perhaps, you don’t have any clue how sexual diseases damages reproductive organs. It is definitely a reason to enjoy their carrier. :reddevil: Or perhaps, you think that women and men who are in porn business enjoy sex in the front of the camera. What is a smooth sexual intercourse is a result of editing. You can’t enjoy sex with hundreds of stop and cut. Have you ever considered why so many porn actresses use alcohol and drugs and many OD or committed suicide?


But my previous post was not about porn actresses at all. Inconvenient truth, eh?

Interesting you mention actresses. Acting and pornography?? I am not sure acting/actresses is the right word but there you go.

[ftil]

Interesting you mention actresses. Acting and pornography?? I am not sure acting/actresses is the right word but there you go.


How would you call them, then? :lol:

BTW, is it only what you have picked up from my two last posts? Is it safer not to touch the most important issues I have addressed? :reddevil:

[tonywalt]

Like said before- most pornography is amatueur in terms of volume.

[cacian]

How would you call them, then? :lol:
Hi ftil when I first laid my eyes on pornography I could not figure out how one could to the point of doing what they were doing in front of cameras and going public in order to be viewed by thousands of people. One of the things that always stood out in my mind is this:
I hoped that no family of any of the pornographers involved ever get their hands on their work/dvds. I felt depressed thinking about it.
Whilst you can control what is going in front of the cameras you cannot control who is going to lay their hands the porn material.
I think family always bothered when it came to porn.


BTW, is it only what you have picked up from my two last posts? Is it safer not to touch the most important issues I have addressed? :reddevil:
Yes and no. I think actressing is stretching it a bit. Pronography is acting sex. Actresses and actors are qualified and trained at drama colleges and porn is not.

[ftil]

Hi ftil when I first laid my eyes on pornography I could not figure out how one could to the point of doing what they were doing in front of cameras and going public in order to be viewed by thousands of people. One of the things that always stood out in my mind is this:
I hoped that no family of any of the pornographers involved ever get their hands on their work/dvds. I felt depressed thinking about it.
Whilst you can control what is going in front of the cameras you cannot control who is going to lay their hands the porn material.
I think family always bothered when it came to porn.


Yes and no. I think actressing is stretching it a bit. Pronography is acting sex. Actresses and actors are qualified and trained at drama colleges and porn is not.


You have missed my points. I have addressed very important issues that women involved in porn bussines are facing such as violence, abuse, contracting sexual diseases, drug and alcohol addiction, OD, or suicides. I have written about it and have posted videos and links to the articles on your thread Voyeurism in Sex.

Second, I talked about negative consequences for those who watch porn such as erectile dysfunction, difficulties to be aroused to a real partner, Desensitization, inability to build an intimate relationships to name a few. My last few posts specifically talked about young people. Please, if you don’t want to address those issues, don’t bother to respond. :yikes:

[Calidore]

Please, if you don’t want to address those issues, don’t bother to respond. :yikes:

It's worth mentioning here that this is a general poll/discussion thread on porn, rather than simply ftil's view on porn, and anyone is allowed to respond to anything.

[MorpheusSandman]

You have missed my points. I have addressed very important issues that women involved in porn bussines are facing such as violence, abuse, contracting sexual diseases, drug and alcohol addiction, OD, or suicides. I have written about it and have posted videos and links to the articles on your thread Voyeurism in Sex.

Second, I talked about negative consequences for those who watch porn such as erectile dysfunction, difficulties to be aroused to a real partner, Desensitization, inability to build an intimate relationships to name a few. My last few posts specifically talked about young people. Please, if you don’t want to address those issues, don’t bother to respond. :yikes:I'm sensing some selection bias. The first paragraph describes zero porn actresses I've ever talked to and the second paragraph describes zero watchers of porn I know.

[ftil]

It's worth mentioning here that this is a general poll/discussion thread on porn, rather than simply ftil's view on porn, and anyone is allowed to respond to anything.

LOL! It is not mine view about porn. You would know if you took time to read my posts.
Second, I have had a conversation with cacian. You have also had conversation with others here.
I didn't stop you to express your opinion. Anxiety. eh?



Originally posted by MorpheusSandman
I'm sensing some selection bias. The first paragraph describes zero porn actresses I've ever talked to and the second paragraph describes zero watchers of porn I know.

I am not going to convince you that there is no bias. It is up to you to do own research.
You may be surprised how many scholars and psychologists you may find who talked about this subject. I am not going to repeat myself as I wrote a few posts about this subject here and on Voyeurism in Sex thread.

Why don’t you argue with scholars and psychologists……I may have fun watching.

[MorpheusSandman]

I am not going to repeat myself as I wrote a few posts about this subject here and on Voyeurism in Sex thread. What page?

EDIT: Never mind, I found it; yeah, I pretty much agree with all of St. Lukes' objections. I'm quite sure you could find just as much "research" that states the obvious. There's nothing in any of your posts that rule out selection bias.

[ftil]

What page?

EDIT: Never mind, I found it; yeah, I pretty much agree with all of St. Lukes' objections. I'm quite sure you could find just as much "research" that states the obvious. There's nothing in any of your posts that rule out selection bias.

If you agree with St. Luke you should talk to him then. He didn’t respond to my last post on Voyeurism in Sex where I asked if he read Libido Dominandi or G. Bruno’s De vinculis in genere to make such a strong criticism. Well, list of scholars is impressive. Try to argue with them……..I may watch and have fun. :lol:

[cacian]

You have missed my points. I have addressed very important issues that women involved in porn bussines are facing such as violence, abuse, contracting sexual diseases, drug and alcohol addiction, OD, or suicides. I have written about it and have posted videos and links to the articles on your thread Voyeurism in Sex.

Second, I talked about negative consequences for those who watch porn such as erectile dysfunction, difficulties to be aroused to a real partner, Desensitization, inability to build an intimate relationships to name a few. My last few posts specifically talked about young people. Please, if you don’t want to address those issues, don’t bother to respond. :yikes:
You know there is no doubt that I agree with everything you say. Pornography is a sad state of affairs the one I would never wish on anyone watching or involved.
In a different pornography would never be. In the present world porn and sex and a desolate affair and speaks volume about the human intellect or the lack of if.

[ftil]

You know there is no doubt that I agree with everything you say. Pornography is a sad state of affairs the one I would never wish on anyone watching or involved.
In a different pornography would never be. In the present world porn and sex and a desolate affair and speaks volume about the human intellect or the lack of if.


Well, I try to not influence what I think but I post material that may stimulate others to further explore that subject. Sadly, the most important issues have been scrupulously avoided. There are many members who are in high school or universities and as adults we have the responsibility to warn them…….if we are truly concerned about their emotional, mental, and physical well being.

I am the last person wanting young men to have erectile dysfunction or empty and meaningless relationships.

[MorpheusSandman]

Well, list of scholars is impressive.I can list an "impressive" list of scholars that doubt evolution and/or believe in intelligent design. That bright minds sometimes believe very dumb things is a fact; that you haven't listed any scrupulous, peer-reviewed, scientific statistics on this matter is a good enough reason to doubt your statements and suspect confirmation and selection bias.


In the present world porn and sex and a desolate affair and speaks volume about the human intellect or the lack of if.It speaks volumes, eh? What does it say, exactly? All I can tell it says is that some people enjoy watching sex. Then there are people like you and ftil that don't and feel the need to mistake your preference for objective fact and foist it onto everyone else.

[cacian]

I can list an "impressive" list of scholars that doubt evolution and/or believe in intelligent design. That bright minds sometimes believe very dumb things is a fact; that you haven't listed any scrupulous, peer-reviewed, scientific statistics on this matter is a good enough reason to doubt your statements and suspect confirmation and selection bias.

It speaks volumes, eh? What does it say, exactly? All I can tell it says is that some people enjoy watching sex. Then there are people like you and ftil that don't and feel the need to mistake your preference for objective fact and foist it onto everyone else.

What does it say let see. It says porn and sex is rather unruly undignified and overterrified as if every single human being is sex driven wild which is not the case.
My experience of porn is unpleasant and I am afraid to say gross. There is nothing in it I find desirable nor enticing.
That is my personal opinion. I feel sorry for those involved in the making because they are the one who suffer the most.
No one in true reality wants to have sex in pornographic style whilst exposed to the world to watch. I do not agree with it and that is how I feel.
For those who enjoy it that is perfectly fine by me as long as I am not involved with it.
So people like me have an opinion it just happen to be different from yours. Maybe if porn was less in your face then maybe I would felt differently.
It is not.
Each to their own.

[MorpheusSandman]

It says porn and sex is rather unruly undignified and overterrified as if every single human being is sex driven wild which is not the case. Why does porn make sex undignified? By depicting it? I don't know what "overterrified" means, and I don't know why the existence of porn suggests every single human being is sex driven; are you sure you're not mistaking porn with Freud?


My experience of porn is unpleasant and I am afraid to say gross. There is nothing in it I find desirable nor enticing.
That is my personal opinion.Right, it's your personal opinion, but don't think that your personal opinion extends to some kind of objective commentary on pornography itself, it's merely a statement about your subjective reaction to it.


I feel sorry for those involved in the making because they are the one who suffer the most. No one in true reality wants to have sex in pornographic style whilst exposed to the world to watch. I do not agree with it and that is how I feel.See, this is what I mean by you taking your subjective reaction and trying to make it an objective fact. You find porn gross, so that must mean that nobody "in true reality" wants to have sex on camera? How do you even begin to substantiate that statement? Every porn actor and actress I've talked to, without exception, got into porn precisely because they enjoyed having sex on camera. None whom I've talked to were ever forced into it, or suffered some profound psychological trauma, or were "abused" by anyone in the business; they did it because they enjoyed it and because it paid well. One actress I talked to said she knew that's what she wanted to do from the time she was 13, and she came from a perfectly normal background, was quite intelligent, and could've easily done anything else with her life if she had wanted. So how do you account for people like her if there aren't actually people out there "in true reality" that wants to have sex on camera?


Maybe if porn was less in your face then maybe I would felt differently. It is not. Each to their own.Less in your face porn is erotica. Maybe try the films of Tinto Brass, and if you don't find them objectionable, try a website like SexArt or X-Art that, while explicit, tend to have a more aesthetic and sensitive approach.

[cacian]

Why does porn make sex undignified? By depicting it? I don't know what "overterrified" means, and I don't know why the existence of porn suggests every single human being is sex driven; are you sure you're not mistaking porn with Freud?

Right, it's your personal opinion, but don't think that your personal opinion extends to some kind of objective commentary on pornography itself, it's merely a statement about your subjective reaction to it.

See, this is what I mean by you taking your subjective reaction and trying to make it an objective fact. You find porn gross, so that must mean that nobody "in true reality" wants to have sex on camera? How do you even begin to substantiate that statement? Every porn actor and actress I've talked to, without exception, got into porn precisely because they enjoyed having sex on camera. None whom I've talked to were ever forced into it, or suffered some profound psychological trauma, or were "abused" by anyone in the business; they did it because they enjoyed it and because it paid well. One actress I talked to said she knew that's what she wanted to do from the time she was 13, and she came from a perfectly normal background, was quite intelligent, and could've easily done anything else with her life if she had wanted. So how do you account for people like her if there aren't actually people out there "in true reality" that wants to have sex on camera?

Less in your face porn is erotica. Maybe try the films of Tinto Brass, and if you don't find them objectionable, try a website like SexArt or X-Art that, while explicit, tend to have a more aesthetic and sensitive approach.

You know I am surprised that porn actors do it because they enjoy it and the money of course goes without saying.
I think the question that comes to mind is this: how could anyone have a normal sexual relationship after so much sex manufactured as part of a daily job. How does anyone want sex after so much of it done as a job?
How does separate between having sex intimately and having sex as a routine job. How do you draw the line?

[Hawg Horse]

Hardcore porn, if we could all somehow agree on an example, does seem to modify main stream public opinion, not always in a bad way, about the place human erotica holds, or should hold, in our lives. Prurient interests, salacious thoughts, lustful desires, of course, are most certainly not per se immoral, or disgusting, and provide primary building blocks for a large slice of inspirational expression, poetry, art. For my taste, the biggest problem with what I would consider porn today, is not that its expression is so disgusting that it reaches an offensive label, like watching soldiers beheading children, but that it lacks poetic luster. For me, there's too much sugar in the pornographic cream, for my current tastes, but I acknowledge my tastes have changed dramatically over time.

[MorpheusSandman]

how could anyone have a normal sexual relationship after so much sex manufactured as part of a daily job. How does anyone want sex after so much of it done as a job? How does separate between having sex intimately and having sex as a routine job. How do you draw the line?You could almost rephrase this to ask the same of any professional that still enjoys other examples of what they do outside of their job. "How can anyone enjoy eating chicken after working at KFC all day?" for example. I guess the answer with sex in porn VS sex in real life is the attendant emotions. The experience of sex on camera is purely physical, but sex in intimate relationships comes with real feelings of love and attraction, and the physical part is enhanced by it and takes on a very different meaning for those involved. One could compare it to the difference between sex in one night stands versus long-term relationships as well; one night stands are about lust and physicality, and sex in those situations is very different than when you're much more emotionally involved with someone. Plus, there is that whole "acting" component involved, which always has a distancing effect, as anyone who's ever acted will know. I was once in a local play where we rehearsed a kissing scene over and over, but afterwards I still wanted to kiss my girlfriend at the time; it's just a completely different thing.

[ftil]

I can list an "impressive" list of scholars that doubt evolution and/or believe in intelligent design. That bright minds sometimes believe very dumb things is a fact; that you haven't listed any scrupulous, peer-reviewed, scientific statistics on this matter is a good enough reason to doubt your statements and suspect confirmation and selection bias.



It sounds that you haven’t read what a few scholars I have mentioned on Voyeurism in Sex wrote?
Why don’t you read Bruno’s De vinculis in genere to find out by yourself if those scholars are right or wrong? De vinculis in genere is considered a cornerstone of modern political thought – on the par with Machiavelli’s Prince. It is considered as the most intelligent and insightful political work and manipulation. Don’t you think that it is good to know how his work has been used to manipulate and control masses?


BTW, it is very interesting that you brought up scholars who doubt evolution. They are very dumb , eh?
Have you heard about The Piltdown Man hoax?


The Piltdown Man was a hoax in which bone fragments were presented as the fossilised remains of a previously unknown early human. These fragments consisted of parts of a skull and jawbone, said to have been collected in 1912 from a gravel pit at Piltdown, East Sussex, England.

The Piltdown hoax is perhaps the most famous paleoanthropological hoax ever to have been perpetrated. It has been prominent for two reasons: the attention paid to the issue of human evolution, and the length of time (more than 40 years) that elapsed from its discovery to its full exposure as a forgery.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man

[stlukesguild]

It sounds that you haven’t read what a few scholars I have mentioned on Voyeurism in Sex wrote?
Why don’t you read Bruno’s De vinculis in genere to find out by yourself if those scholars are right or wrong? De vinculis in genere is considered a cornerstone of modern political thought – on the par with Machiavelli’s Prince.

As my signature says... or used to say: "Beware the man (or woman) with one book." I'm sorry but outside of scholars interested in 16th century Italian literature and/or philosophy (or those obsessed with esoteric texts, magic and the occult), neither Giordano Bruno nor De vinculis in genere are anywhere near being major cornerstones in any branch of Western thought. I'm probably not going out on a branch much to suggest that both MorpheusSandman and myself have likely read far more than yourself... including (certainly in my case) many major works of literature dating from the Italian Renaissance. Certainly I have come upon Bruno's name and his ideas are mentioned as precursors (among numerous others) to certain branches of modern thought, but I suspect you greatly overstate his importance... especially to questions of pornography and your notions of modern seduction of the masses. Considering the blatant antisemitism behind the ideas of your other "scholar", E. Michael Jones, one might suggest that the Nazis would be a better source of information on mass hysteria and manipulation of the masses.

The Piltdown Man was a hoax in which bone fragments were presented as the fossilised remains of a previously unknown early human. These fragments consisted of parts of a skull and jawbone, said to have been collected in 1912 from a gravel pit at Piltdown, East Sussex, England.

The Piltdown hoax is perhaps the most famous paleoanthropological hoax ever to have been perpetrated. It has been prominent for two reasons: the attention paid to the issue of human evolution, and the length of time (more than 40 years) that elapsed from its discovery to its full exposure as a forgery.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man

This only serves to prove Morpheus' suggestion that one can always find scholars and scientists whose ideas do not fit with the accepted norms. It also illustrates that science can be manipulated by individuals set on proving their questionable biases at all costs. But you would have us accept that the ideas of the scientists, philosophers, etc... that support your personal bias trump the opinions of all others. Of course beyond the quoted passage from wiki on the topic, you might also have come upon the following:

From the outset, some scientists expressed skepticism about the Piltdown find. G.S. Miller, for example, observed in 1915 (3 years after the Piltdown Man fragments were "found) that "deliberate malice could hardly have been more successful than the hazards of deposition in so breaking the fossils as to give free scope to individual judgment in fitting the parts together." In the decades prior to its exposure as a forgery in 1953, scientists increasingly regarded Piltdown as an enigmatic aberration inconsistent with the path of hominid evolution as demonstrated by fossils found elsewhere. Skeptical scientists only increased in number as more fossils were found.

In November 1953, Time published evidence gathered variously by Kenneth Page Oakley, Sir Wilfrid Edward Le Gros Clark and Joseph Weiner proving that the Piltdown Man was a forgery and demonstrating that the fossil was a composite of three distinct species. It consisted of a human skull of medieval age, the 500-year-old lower jaw of a Sarawak orangutan and chimpanzee fossil teeth.

[ftil]

Originally posted by stlukesguild
This only serves to prove Morpheus' suggestion that one can always find scholars and scientists whose ideas do not fit with the accepted norms. It also illustrates that science can be manipulated by individuals set on proving their questionable biases at all costs. But you would have us accept that the ideas of the scientists, philosophers, etc... that support your personal bias trump the opinions of all others.



I agree that science can be manipulated, therefore, we need to get serious about doing own research before accepting any theory. We have been bombarded with pseudo-scientists who can’t even defend their theory when challenged by other scholars.

BTW, do you remember my post at Voyeurism in Sex where I asked you if your read a few books to make a such a strong criticism? How can we have any discussion without reading what scholars wrote? It is a poor attempt to avoid addressing the issues that affect everybody.

We cannot forget that any theory is just educated guesswork and nothing else. Knowledge is power and critical thinking is a must.

[Anton Hermes]

Have you heard about The Piltdown Man hoax?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it wasn't a creationist who exposed the Piltdown forgery. It was conventional paleontologists, guys who believe humans and apes share a common ancestor, who used material dating methods to demonstrate that the bones of the "skull" were of vastly different ages.

And nowadays it's creationists who are the ones peddling hoaxes, such as the supposed human footprints alongside the dinosaur tracks in the Paluxy river bed. So if you're talking about the need for critical thinking, the line cuts both ways.

[ftil]

Originally posted by stlukesguild

As my signature says... or used to say: "Beware the man (or woman) with one book." I'm sorry but outside of scholars interested in 16th century Italian literature and/or philosophy (or those obsessed with esoteric texts, magic and the occult), neither Giordano Bruno nor De vinculis in genere are anywhere near being major cornerstones in any branch of Western thought. I'm probably not going out on a branch much to suggest that both MorpheusSandman and myself have likely read far more than yourself... including (certainly in my case) many major works of literature dating from the Italian Renaissance. Certainly I have come upon Bruno's name and his ideas are mentioned as precursors (among numerous others) to certain branches of modern thought, but I suspect you greatly overstate his importance... especially to questions of pornography and your notions of modern seduction of the masses. Considering the blatant antisemitism behind the ideas of your other "scholar", E. Michael Jones, one might suggest that the Nazis would be a better source of information on mass hysteria and manipulation of the masses.

Well, I have given a few scholars who wrote about Bruno but the list is much longer.
Oxford scholars and intellectuals considered Bruno’s work as a cornerstone of political thoughts. Are you going to investigate this subject or just refuse anything without studying? No very mature.

Second, you have done a classic character assassination of E. Michael Jones. You have made your judgment without reading Libido Dominandi but you have made your opinion based on an excerpt from Jones' book Francis' Legacy as you wrote, “One need only read an excerpt from Jones' book Francis' Legacy to see that sexual freedom is simply a peripheral concern of the good doctor. His real focus is the Jews”

I didn’t talk about his other books but specifically about his interview about Libido Dominandi. BTW, he is not the only one to be called anti-Semite. The list is a little bit longer and I have read a few books of those authors who have been attacked. There has been nothing there that would qualify to call them anti-Semite. Well, it was Wikipedia or a few Masonic websites…not reliable source to depend on.

It is always better to read a book to make up own mind. When you read books I have mentioned……I will be interested to talk. Otherwise, find somebody else to talk. I have been at elementary school a while ago and I prefer intelligent discussion. :lol:




originally posted by Anton Hermes
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it wasn't a creationist who exposed the Piltdown forgery. It was conventional paleontologists, guys who believe humans and apes share a common ancestor, who used material dating methods to demonstrate that the bones of the "skull" were of vastly different ages.

And nowadays it's creationists who are the ones peddling hoaxes, such as the supposed human footprints alongside the dinosaur tracks in the Paluxy river bed. So if you're talking about the need for critical thinking, the line cuts both ways.


You may want to read about Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Jesuit priest who took part in the discovery of Piltdown Man. The rabbit hole is deeper that we may think. It is not about the fight about creationists and evolutionists as many scholars who are atheists criticized that theory. But this thread is about porn isn’t it?

[tonywalt]

But this thread is about porn isn’t it?

Of course it isn't.

This "Serious Discussion" sub-forum has become a Hydes park speakers corner where you just simply steer onto a tangent of your own liking and interest and go with it. Which is why I play on the forum games.

[Scheherazade]

But this thread is about porn isn’t it?No.

This thread has simply been created to discuss/find out about our members' attitude towards pornography. No one is expected to do precursory reading to share what they think or feel on the subject.

[Anton Hermes]

What's "porn"?

[ftil]

No.

This thread has simply been created to discuss/find out about our members' attitude towards pornography. No one is expected to do precursory reading to share what they think or feel on the subject.

And this is how I understood that the purpose is to talk about attitude about pornography. Everybody is unique and has a different approach to that subject. Nothing is wrong about that and I hope that everybody has the rights to speak freely.

[Delta40]

No.

This thread has simply been created to discuss/find out about our members' attitude towards pornography. No one is expected to do precursory reading to share what they think or feel on the subject.

Really? While I'm enjoying the "I've read more books than you have :prrr:" as I haven't read any, I rather suspect any opinion I offer will be discounted.

[Scheherazade]

And this is how I understood that the purpose is to talk about attitude about pornography. Everybody is unique and has a different approach to that subject. Nothing is wrong about that and I hope that everybody has the rights to speak freely.Indeed... As long as you do not discourage them expressing their opinions or discount them just because they did not happen to read the three books you mentioned.

What's more, I am sure we are all able to express our opinions without hiding behind some obscure "scientist" or "research".

[ftil]

Really? While I'm enjoying the "I've read more books than you have :prrr:" as I haven't read any, I rather suspect any opinion I offer will be discounted.

No, you misunderstood my intentions. It is always better to ask for clarification rather than making assumptions. I never talk about the subject I haven’t studied. Second, I don’t like to influence others what I think but I post links or quotes to stimulate discussion. If members reject other scholars without being familiar with their work, I call on it because I don’t want to continue meaningless conversation.

You may find other members who will be willing to continue......

Enjoy LitNet.

[JBI]

Well good Renaissance obscure author quoting. Now realize the vast market for porn is not in European or American hands, and realize attitudes toward pornography, and trends of the market are different in other parts of the world, or even the modern world.

That being said, the most simple response to your silly notions of abuse and the awful situation of the market in porn is this: how many women film and put themselves on the internet? How many couples film themselves and put themselves online, many for free? How many people dream of doing porn, and may even do it for free? How many people in these self-filmed enterprises have a good time doing it? maybe people consider the job a form of performance, in which they have a relationship with the invisible viewer, the same way a good actor can think of the craft as a form of performance with the audience in mind? Taking pride in the audience's enjoyment?

Now, who ever considered that? Likewise, I would have pegged you a Dworkin reader, who has already taken such a beating from feminist authors that I do not need to add fuel to the fire. The assumptions in the late 70s and 80s are no longer true. The industry requirement on protection and inspection for diseases has increased significantly since knowledge about the AIDS virus has become widespread. Many producers require the use of prophylactics. What do you think of that then?

As for a woman not enjoying being filmed for hours, maybe she enjoys knowing that the audience will enjoy the final product? Are you suggesting that an actor in movies cannot love acting for a director who insists on retakes and filming from different angles, such as famous directors like Kubrick.

I think the thing more likely to lead women in the industry to abuse and depression is not the people in the industry, but the rabid men and women in the public who treat them as animals and victims of abuse regardless of their own agency and their own freedoms. Imagine if a bible pushing annoying woman was breathing down your throat that on one hand you are a devil and an insult to women everywhere and an accomplice to male abuse against women, yet on the other hand you are the victim of an oppressive male society.

[TaxMan]

ftil may be right about the porn industry because it's just so big. There are so many porn producers out there--any sleeze ball with a camera and Internet can rope in a drugged out prostitute to shoot a video for some cash, but the big porn companies, the main production companies don't operate that way. The actresses seem into it (and yes, I realize this is what actresses do) when watching interviews. I'm not going to name actresses or companies (I don't know how far to take details in a discussion like this on a forum like this), but I can think of plenty. If its not an established production company with a track record, I don't watch it.

As to people, just men apparently, who are addicted to porn and develop all those bad habits and effects, those, like most cases of addiction, are surely the minority

[Varenne Rodin]

Most people are just looking for something to do each day. Sometimes some people look at naked people.

[Hawg Horse]

Wisdom Varenne ... with style and grace. Among competing hypotheses, the one that makes the fewest assumptions.

[Varenne Rodin]

I try to state things simply. Thank you.

[Buh4Bee]

I also laughed at your post Varenne. It was innocently humorous.

[Hawg Horse]

Glassing galaxies; befriending molecules; watching naked people; always someting ... to do.

[ftil]

Well good Renaissance obscure author quoting.

Well, it is not obscure and many scholars studied it in depth. I appreciate their work very much. If it wasn’t Eros and Magic in the Renaissance written by prof. Ioan P. Couliano, I would never read G. Bruno. I would never found out why C. Jung was a godfather of art therapy and from where art therapy originated.


That being said, the most simple response to your silly notions of abuse and the awful situation of the market in porn is this: how many women film and put themselves on the internet? How many couples film themselves and put themselves online, many for free? How many people dream of doing porn, and may even do it for free? How many people in these self-filmed enterprises have a good time doing it? maybe people consider the job a form of performance, in which they have a relationship with the invisible viewer, the same way a good actor can think of the craft as a form of performance with the audience in mind? Taking pride in the audience's enjoyment?



“Your silly notion of abuse”…….it is not my notion but I have posted a few videos where former porn actresses talked about their experience. Argue with them.


Do you ask those questions to find out if the data is available or you ask if it would be even possible to gather that information? Or, you just make assumptions that you know how many people dream about doing porn for example. :lol:

[MorpheusSandman]

Why don’t you read Bruno’s De vinculis in genere to find out by yourself if those scholars are right or wrong?It requires a bit more than reading a single author to find out if they're right or wrong. I specifically asked for peer-reviewed studies and statistics, and you respond with books written hundreds of years ago...


BTW, it is very interesting that you brought up scholars who doubt evolution. They are very dumb , eh?
Have you heard about The Piltdown Man hoax?The Piltdown Man was doubted by evolutionary paleontologists, who were also the ones that eventually debunked it. All of the alternatives to evolution are the very definitions of pseudo-science as they make zero predictions or retrodictions, so, instead, they spend all of their time, money, and resources cherry-picking those few moments when bad things are done in the name of evolutionary science (Piltdown), or when various famous evolutionists are proven wrong (the recent Junk DNA study by ENCODE). They then ignore the enormous mountains of evidence in favor of evolution that they can't refute, many of which they can't even understand, like ERV viruses, or the predictions about the closeness of human and ape DNA many years before we had mapped the genome.


I agree that science can be manipulated, therefore, we need to get serious about doing own research before accepting any theory."Doing your own research" is pointless unless you have a stringent methodology, a desire to arrive at the truth, and a knowledge of how to avoid the pitfalls of biases. You relying on selective anecdotal evidence is one such bias.


We cannot forget that any theory is just educated guesswork and nothing else. Oh, geez, not this again. Don't they teach what the meaning of "scientific theory" is in gradeschool any more? I distinctly remember learning about it, yet I can't count how many times I see people on the internet repeating this nonsense about scientific theories not being proven or just being educated guesswork. When educated guesswork starts making scarily accurate predictions, that's darn good evidence the theory is right.


I have posted a few videos where former porn actresses talked about their experience.How many former porn actresses? All of them? Because, seriously, you can just as easily find reports of abuse in any workplace. It's the reason we've developed rules about handling sexual harassment in the workplace.


Do you ask those questions to find out if the data is available or you ask if it would be even possible to gather that information? Or, you just make assumptions that you know how many people dream about doing porn for example. I would actually like to know if there is any data available. Every porn actor/actress I've talked to do what they do because they enjoy it and it pays well. None were forced into it or have been abused since getting into it. Of course, those I've talked to also work for reputable companies, which probably helps.

[Varenne Rodin]

I also laughed at your post Varenne. It was innocently humorous.

Thank you, BB. :)


Glassing galaxies; befriending molecules; watching naked people; always someting ... to do.

Not bad, Horse. :)

[ftil]

It requires a bit more than reading a single author to find out if they're right or wrong. I specifically asked for peer-reviewed studies and statistics, and you respond with books written hundreds of years ago...




Where did I say that it was about one author? If you read my posts, you would know that.

You asked for peer reviewed studies.......you will find it if you choose to do so. Follow the names of professors I mentioned and don't forget Oxford scholars. You should know how to do that and don't ask others to do a homework for you. It is not elementary school. :D

Since you have ignored what I said, I don’t bother to respond to the rest your post. I don't have time to waste to repeat it again and again. :yikes:

[MorpheusSandman]

You should know how to do that and don't ask others to do a homework for you. It is not elementary school. What homework are you doing for me? Providing me with statistic studies for arguments you're making? Really?

[JBI]

Well, it is not obscure and many scholars studied it in depth. I appreciate their work very much. If it wasn’t Eros and Magic in the Renaissance written by prof. Ioan P. Couliano, I would never read G. Bruno. I would never found out why C. Jung was a godfather of art therapy and from where art therapy originated.





“Your silly notion of abuse”…….it is not my notion but I have posted a few videos where former porn actresses talked about their experience. Argue with them.


Do you ask those questions to find out if the data is available or you ask if it would be even possible to gather that information? Or, you just make assumptions that you know how many people dream about doing porn for example. :lol:
Yes and women have never been harassed in other industries? Seriously, many women in many fields in the 80s were victims of all sorts of abuse. Many women in many industries are still victims of abuse today. This isn't restricted to pornography. But instead of relating them to some bestial abused animals maybe you can advocate an improvement in working conditions? Maybe instead of your self-righteous notions about your Western lifestyle you can start to consider that there is a lot more going on than in your philosophy.

As for the industry, I already mentioned the largest producer in terms of number of videos is no longer the United States - it is Japan. That being said, you still did not address the fact that women put themselves willingly online for no other reason than people watching. Many, many do it.

Now, if we were to talk about the industry in the 70s, you would mostly be right, in the 80s a little less right, in the 90s, mostly wrong, and now, even less right. The industry has changed, as have many industries in the past 30-40 years. In truth, the whole film industry, not just pornography has changed considerably.

That being said, you can discuss certain things in addition to this, for instance, how many women were sexually abused before getting into the industry. How many people are drug addicts who do not do porn. How many drug addicts work in supermarkets? how many women working in super-markets have been abused?

There you have it, I have created the same diagram. With that in place we say this, since women in the industry are in a precarious position, rather than you pointing fingers and calling them drug-addicted abused prostitutes, maybe you should start to think of who you are representing. Not only are you rude to those in the industry, you also are dismissing of them and putting them in a far more marginalized position. I do not give a crap how much ancient literature you cite, the point is right now you are talking for people you have no authority to speak for.

If you want to advocate something and feel good, advocate safe sex and better working conditions for pornographic actors, don't advocate people regarding them as the damned of the earth. Of course the industry has problems, as do the modeling industry, the film industry, the theatre industry, and almost every performance industry, not to mention the service industry in restaurants, and many other industries. Maybe the bads are more common in porn, who knows, but that does not make porn bad, merely the production. As for the sex itself, if somebody enjoys having sex on camera, or wants to make money have sex on camera, I see no problem with it as long as it is regulated and taxed. If they are an addict, like many athletes, businessmen, and other "respected" people, then they have the same choices, live with the problem or go to rehab. How many professional athletes have been violent or intoxicated, let alone actors and statesmen. There is a lot of sex and abuse in politics, I do not here you throwing feces at them. No, pick on the poor girl who was tricked into porn by her addiction - much better, she is more fitting for public defamation, persecution, and slaughter.

[ftil]

Originally posted by MorpheusSandman
What homework are you doing for me? Providing me with statistic studies for arguments you're making? Really?

This is not what I said.

Enjoy LitNet.




Yes and women have never been harassed in other industries? Seriously, many women in many fields in the 80s were victims of all sorts of abuse. Many women in many industries are still victims of abuse today. This isn't restricted to pornography. But instead of relating them to some bestial abused animals maybe you can advocate an improvement in working conditions? Maybe instead of your self-righteous notions about your Western lifestyle you can start to consider that there is a lot more going on than in your philosophy.

As for the industry, I already mentioned the largest producer in terms of number of videos is no longer the United States - it is Japan. That being said, you still did not address the fact that women put themselves willingly online for no other reason than people watching. Many, many do it.

Now, if we were to talk about the industry in the 70s, you would mostly be right, in the 80s a little less right, in the 90s, mostly wrong, and now, even less right. The industry has changed, as have many industries in the past 30-40 years. In truth, the whole film industry, not just pornography has changed considerably.

That being said, you can discuss certain things in addition to this, for instance, how many women were sexually abused before getting into the industry. How many people are drug addicts who do not do porn. How many drug addicts work in supermarkets? how many women working in super-markets have been abused?

There you have it, I have created the same diagram. With that in place we say this, since women in the industry are in a precarious position, rather than you pointing fingers and calling them drug-addicted abused prostitutes, maybe you should start to think of who you are representing. Not only are you rude to those in the industry, you also are dismissing of them and putting them in a far more marginalized position. I do not give a crap how much ancient literature you cite, the point is right now you are talking for people you have no authority to speak for.

If you want to advocate something and feel good, advocate safe sex and better working conditions for pornographic actors, don't advocate people regarding them as the damned of the earth. Of course the industry has problems, as do the modeling industry, the film industry, the theatre industry, and almost every performance industry, not to mention the service industry in restaurants, and many other industries. Maybe the bads are more common in porn, who knows, but that does not make porn bad, merely the production. As for the sex itself, if somebody enjoys having sex on camera, or wants to make money have sex on camera, I see no problem with it as long as it is regulated and taxed. If they are an addict, like many athletes, businessmen, and other "respected" people, then they have the same choices, live with the problem or go to rehab. How many professional athletes have been violent or intoxicated, let alone actors and statesmen. There is a lot of sex and abuse in politics, I do not here you throwing feces at them. No, pick on the poor girl who was tricked into porn by her addiction - much better, she is more fitting for public defamation, persecution, and slaughter.


What your response has to do with what I wrote? I am not going to make assumptions why you didn’t address the issues I have brought up. To be honest, I am not interested to know at this point and I am not going to repeat myself again.

I am sure that you will find members who will enjoy continuing your discussion. :D

[MorpheusSandman]

This is not what I said.I quoted you exactly... I asked your for statistical studies, you claimed I would find them if I looked but you won't do my homework for me by providing me with links. It very much seems like you're out of ammunition once your few, selected sources are exhausted.

[MarkBastable]

I am sure that you will find members who will enjoy continuing your discussion. :D

Does this mean you're going to stop?

[ftil]

Does this mean you're going to stop?


No, but I choose when I want to be engaged in discussion and with whom. :lol:

[cacian]

Interesting that I keep thinking the thread title looks a bit like photography and phonography. It is the APHY in porn that intrigues me.

[JBI]

This is not what I said.

Enjoy LitNet.






What your response has to do with what I wrote? I am not going to make assumptions why you didn’t address the issues I have brought up. To be honest, I am not interested to know at this point and I am not going to repeat myself again.

I am sure that you will find members who will enjoy continuing your discussion. :D

That I do not care for Jung is one reason I am not going to debate a dated psychoanalyst during a discussion of the appropriateness of pornography. I was commenting on the vibe of your posts in general, not just this specific one.

[JuniperWoolf]

The mundanity of pornography for it's employees hasn't been discussed much yet. We've had the suggestion that actresses actually work in the industry for pleasure, and we've had a say from the "drug-addicted abused prostitutes" camp, but pornography is before anything else an industry. It's a job, a paycheque. My boyfriend has done set work for a few productions, there are people everywhere messing with equipment and there's a snack table, the sound is added afterwards and it's all made more fluid in editing because throughout the actual filming there's a lot of discussion and interruption, just like on any other set. It has a business-like atmosphere. The actors themselves are normal people, if they were crack heads they wouldn't be in porn because they'd look like crack heads. It's a competative field, if you can't do your job and you look like hell you get fired.

Also, porn pretty obviously objectifies men as well, in that they're usually depicted as literally just a pelvis. The male actors are filmed to appear as unobtrusive as possible, that's a bit degrading. But like I said, that's the craft, that's what the market wants. There's nothing wrong with that, really creating pornography isn't a bad way to make a living. Beats carrying plates or doing office work for a lot of people, otherwise they'd do those things instead, because they're adults and they have a right to and are capable of making their own lifestyle choices.

[ftil]

That I do not care for Jung is one reason I am not going to debate a dated psychoanalyst during a discussion of the appropriateness of pornography. I was commenting on the vibe of your posts in general, not just this specific one.

And I was talking about my posts where I have addressed specific issues and not about Jung. I was very specific and it has nothing to do with vibes in my posts. :lol:

I have mentioned Jung because Bruno’s work answered my questions from where Jung got his idea about using art in therapy. Bruno wrote a masterpiece about mass control and manipulation. Funny, how everything is connected when we dig deep.

BTW, art therapy has nothing to do with psychoanalysis and I am the last person to be interested in psychoanalysis. :brow:

[OrphanPip]

There's an obscenity trial ongoing in Montreal this week trying to determine the legal distinction between pornography and art. The reason being that the defendant had a website that staged sexualized violence (cannibalism, snuff films, etc.) but he used special effects rather than actual violence to produce them. Canadian law says legal pornography can not contain torture or extreme violence. The defendant says his videos are art and not pornography.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2012/12/18/remy-couture-defends-work-court.html

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/12/18/im-not-a-pornographer-quebec-gore-artist-defends-photos-of-murder-sexual-assault/

Personally I think the case is silly, he should have got a slap on the wrist for not age-restricting his site.

[Scheherazade]

The OP:

What a way to start off the new week!

The poll is anonymous so no one can see your answer.

Please answer truthfully.

[cacian]

coming back to this topic I once watched about a programm trying to make official or popular pornography for disabled people. I wonder what people think of this. is finally pornography admitting it is divisive or separatist?

[JBI]

coming back to this topic I once watched about a programm trying to make official or popular pornography for disabled people. I wonder what people think of this. is finally pornography admitting it is divisive or separatist?

Do the disabled get off to something others don't?

[cacian]

Do the disabled get off to something others don't?

exactly what i thought lol