It's like everytime i blink somebody is bashing America. We just see things differently than others and all of a sudden we're horrible people. We split from the King of England because of random bans like this that takes away from the people. I agree that child pornography should be banned because it is wrong, but banning porn entirely is asinine.There is people who enjoy watching it, much to my confusion sometimes but they do. You either like it or you don't, America just sees it as bad because we think it will create devious mindsets into young children and teenagers that happen to watch it. It's just something that America thinks it's a big thing to be upset about. I agree that American thinking isn't exactly logical at times, but that doesn't mean our views at porn is necessarily wrong. The UK and America became two nations because we have different ways of looking at things. I'm not trying to start a conflict between the two nations i'm just trying to brings things to perspective. American culture is not like the English culture, so getting angry at Americans for viewing Porn in a different light for it being explicit is silly. I think American parents should be more angry at blood guts and gore more than nudity because one day their kid will take part in those activities in the middle of their life.
I don't LOL often, but now I did. It's still difficult to dismiss this. I can't watch a skinny lady on her knees with her every orifice stuffed -- and this is "normal porn" you get e.g. in your run-of-the-mill hotel. It's not everything that's out there, we as consumers can make a choice, but it does twist my guts to see that type of "entertainment." But I suppose it's almost the same with excessive violence sold as entertainment. I digest it when it has a point, some artistic merit, if it's supposed to the shake the viewer or make them open their eyes (let's say an anti-war movie), but when it's gratuitous... To me that sounds a little bit naive. If film industry is corrupt, brutal and whatnot, how much better can porn industry be? How well regulated? or do e.g. prostitution and human trafficking raise their ugly heads in that highly regulated and throroughly professional industry too? What about that kid who became a porn superstar, was it at the age of 16? Is it really that easy to scam the producers with a fake ID? Not that we really give a shit about the sex object having to be 18 -- didn't that mess of a girl, Courtney Stodden, become a piece of ass for old men to drool after when she married some has-been and started dressing like a stripper at 16 -- but at least the professional industry should stick to using adult actors and acresses. I think we are monkeys because we also watch simulated sex pretty much every day when we turn on the TV and Showtime or HBO or Fox or whatever major channel is on. I do share your sentiment to a degree. I don't watch porn, I don't need it -- not at this point of my life anyway -- but I don't think it's all evil either and building all kinds of "perv-databases" is dubious. It's like the gun owner database (which is reality nowadays). You get the stamp of a degenerate because there're some skittish government pervs who thought it would look good to the loudest and most hypocritical portion of the people if law X and regulation Y were made reality. My first reaction was "where in GD hell to you live and who do you associate with?" but never mind, maybe the context is not that relevant. Still, I'm not sure what this "proves"... I mean, most people find sex fun, and it's a little different to have a one-night-stand on your own terms than be kidnapped, sold to a foreign country, and forced to become an adult "star" (not that this is every porn star's story, of course not). Do you mean these guys wouldn't have asked you to do this stuff if it wasn't for porn?
If greek mythology was ever made into an accurate film, it would be the most x rated porn/violent/action film in the history of the world. Maybe we shouldn't read it? Maybe we should destroy all ancient statues for being naked? Oh, dear, can you imagine those perverts who send their kids to the archaeological museums to see such things? Those museums should be for adults only! Sorry about the sarcasm, but there was a tourist once (I won't mention a nationality) who actually told me that he freaked out to see school children in the archaeological museum in Athens. Because of the nude statues of men. Which freaked me out, because I though HE was in fact the pervert. I didn't say it though. Anyway, porn... What did men do before the internet? They were free of porn in the uk? I don't think so. If the uk goverment wants to free the public of some sick scenes they should go to the root of the problem, not ban something alltogether. I am very happy they are using the internet to catch pedophiles, though. Despite all the debate about big brother, censorship, etc, I am so happy they can do that!
I would just like to remind everyone that I do not advocate ban on any porn (except rape etc). I advocate returning the porn back to the margins of the society, which means ban on porn advertising all over the internet and on sites that are visited by people who have no intention or desire to view it. I want to not have to be aware of pornography and all the demeaning bs that it gives. I cry when I see young girls being hurt, you can see it on their faces, and being a doctor, I can pick up pain, discomfort, intoxication, desperation, I'm trained to pick up on that and for me porn is torture because where most guys see nothing wrong, I see rampant abuse. Sure a lot of porn involves actresses who are there willingly, but they are invariably vulnerable girls with a history of abuse, and most are smacked out of their minds during filming. Did you know that it's regular practice to put anaesthetic gel or even cocaine on their vaginas and clitoris, to be able to withstand the abuse of their body parts. Women don't get off on that kind of porn (99% of hetero porn), men do. I want most men to grow up with sex ed, learning and knowing to distinguish a woman that is enjoying it from the one who isn't. I want them to learn that those poor girls are someone daughters, and mothers, and sisters, and even wives. They are damaged, many women are in this world, to exploit them and then accuse them for participating, is a losing argument. You can't blame the victim. Male porn stars usually love it, although even they tend to be are vulnerable, in a similar way to the females. Which makes gay porn not much different. I tend to form opinions based on facts, and unless it's my area of expertise, I tend to look to reputable sources for verifiable facts on the basis of which I can form an informed opinion. There are many definitions of porn, and 'my' definition isn't mine at all, it's a combination of several well-established theories on pornography, backed up by academic theory and research in sexual side-effects of it. So 'my' definition is the artistic and feminist one - pornography is 1. Depiction of graphic sexual acts with the only intent to aid masturbation; 2. Neglects female pleasure, either declaratively or in fact or most commonly - both; 3. Shows "pneumatic" type mechanical "fucking" in such a way that for a normal woman (and sometimes a man) the sex would be painful and possibly damaging; 3. There's no discernible artistic merit (thesis have been written in proving and explaining what artistic merit actually is, so I won't go into it, but I trust we all know the difference. And yeah, feeling blissful after masturbation does not qualify as artistic merit.) 4. Simulation of any illegal activity during sex, such as rape, paedophilia and worse, is criminal pornography.. I grew up in a society where sex was a normal thing. You could buy non-abusive porn mags, with focus on erotic stories, all women and men depicted were clearly not underage and from what I can remember, aggressive, violent, demeaning attitudes just weren't a part of it. For example, daddy-daughter porn was considered illegal, because it encourages paedophilia and incest. But you had as many consenting adults getting it on as you can imagine. But I haven't experiences sex as a taboo until I was almost an adult, when I emigrated. Since then, I've familiarised myself with the way this thing works in the western world, including the effect it has on people and relationships psychologically. I concluded that graphic sexual acts per se aren't a problem. But pornography definitely is. It's just my opinion, I don't aim to convince anyone, but I am relieved to see that there are others, willing to try and curb pornography because I think it proliferated not due to basic enormous interest, but because of the advent of the internet and the consumers use it because it's there. High addiction rate account for this apparent overwhelming need and want for it, but it's the same argument as with smoking. Push a drug on people without telling them it's a drug, it's your fault when they become addicts, not theirs.
I think by that definition I apparently haven't been opposing the ban of porn, I've been opposing the ban of graphic sex, the main purpose of which is to titillate and arouse the viewer... Anyways, there's also male gay porn which neglects the pleasure of women (except the pleasure of the female viewer!) because there are none, so by the artistic/feminist definition of porn, that's not pornography, is it? Or is it like, 3 out of 4 of the criteria you listed have to be met? I just think that as with nigh everything, moderation is the key.
[MENTION=53403]KaTrian[/MENTION]: I specified that my definition is a feminist one, and I mentioned gay porn as well in my comment. I watched gay porn a few times with my gay friends and I thought it was ten times more emotional than the average hetero porn. But I saw a lot more hetero than gay porn (whether I wanted to see it or not) so I speak about that mainly. And I don't know why is everyone talking about this "ban on porn". Nobody, not even British government is proposing a ban. They are just trying to clean up the internet, and rightfully so. I'm sure porn will always be available so all the connoisseurs shouldn't panic quite so much
[MENTION=35110]jazzabel[/MENTION] : Yeah, I also mentioned in my first post that the UK can't really go through with this, nor with the database thing, but since the conversation veered towards banning it because it's harmful etc., I added my thoughts on that too. I just find the artistic/feminist definition interesting, so thanks for sharing it.
[MENTION=53403]KaTrian[/MENTION]: I'm so sorry, I missed that. I've been busy the last week or so, and the discussions have been so interesting, that I got involved but didn't have time to really follow all that was said
The porn industry is like any other, some movies come from ethical companies and others come from heroin injected, trafficked women. Should we ban it, or block it all from the internet or try stop the traffickers? The same argument can be shifted towards coffee or chocolate. Farmers in South America are being screwed left right and centre by Nescafe and Maxwell House to put a latte on your table or a bar in your pocket while other companies are producing fair trade where farmers are paid a decent ransom for their produce. Should we ban coffee and chocolate because people won't pay an extra pound or dollar per jar of fair trade? [MENTION=53403]KaTrian[/MENTION] it's very easy and probably all too problematic to pick out some pornstars gone bad or women enslaved, drugged and forced to have every orifice filled. I don't think anyone has a problem with violent porn being banned, the question is where is the line? Will a bit of slap and tickle from paid, voluntary men and women be banned? Light spanking? BDSM? And while a few people have mentioned that porn is not being banned, let's make clear; everyday, consensual, vanilla porn is being blocked. Internet viewers will have to contact their service provider and put their name on a database of porn viewers. Violent or even simulated rape scenes will be banned completely and anybody wishing to access kiddie-porn or child rape will get a pop-up with a help line number. Cameron feels he has no opposition to this and it will pass. Service Providers will have no choice but to comply. According to the Oxford English Dictionary Pornography is defined as: noun [mass noun] printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity, intended to stimulate sexual excitement. I think the definition 'mechanical fucking machines intended to hurt women' is highly unfair, even if some women are turned on by the hope they can't walk the day after. A popular poster doing the facebook rounds at the minute says, 'You want your woman to make you a sandwich after sex? If she can walk to the kitchen you don't deserve a fckn sandwich!' I'm sure facebookers have seen it and as far as I can see, it's the girls passing it round as it pokes fun at men, I certainly wouldn't perpetuate it. Sex, whether watched or participated in, is all things to all people beit a man and women, two guys, two girls, groups or even a poor unsuspecting pizza boy delivering a 12inch salami special to four girls innocently playing twister to Je'taime. As long as it hurts no one, where's the harm? Why the self knicker-twisting? And websites containing porn ads are not the responsibility of govts either. Only sites of that nature will have those ads so it's the sites the user chooses to visit that has to police itself to it's client-base. Disney won't show them, neither will news sites or anything mainstream. If someone accidentally clicks on a site with dodgy ads, the chances are the site itself is dodgier than the ad. And I don't know anyone, ever, accidentally clicking on kiddie-porn, beastiality or rape sites. These site have to be actively searched for. I agree that spammers and sites that infect our computers with porn pop-ups should be outlawed but again I'll say, I don't think I should have to call some service provider to put my name on a database of porn consumers. I would have thought most people would be against such draconian movements especially in the light of recent spying operations coming to light.
I wasn't talking about banning, merely challenged the claim that the industry in the US is highly regulated and thoroughly professional. Anyway, are you familiar with Gail Dines who's done research about the porn industry (specifically here in the West)? Even when one tries to be critical towards her findings, it's still stomach-turning. Perhaps, just like we can buy that fair trade banana, we could make better choices when it comes to graphic sex/porn/whatchawannacallit, and raise awareness about the industry, the type of productions prevalent on the internet, porn's impact on men and women, girls and boys, and so on.
[MENTION=52161]erebh[/MENTION]: First of all, why can't we curb the porn (not ban) AND fight the traffickers? Also, re: chocolate - you can't make a completely inaccurate premise at the beginning of your argument and build the rest on it and expect it to hold. Penis or a hard object being inserted into an orifice, whether on screen or in real life, is NOT the same as any other industry, business, activity at all. Sex has been used as a weapon since time immemorial, as a form of subjugation, punishment, demeaning, hurt. Rape in war is rife, for that reason. And if you think porn doesn't have a clear definition, try defining rape in legal system, and see where you end up. You think that if you were raped (hypothetically speaking, of course), and had physical evidence and bruises to show for it, that courts and the society would see it as rape? Think again, and have a look at 18 month suspended sentences for acts that will scar and traumatise a person forever. Oh, and less than 3% conviction rate for one of the most common severe crimes we have today. To pretend this doesn't extend to porn industry is just wishful thinking. Porn actresses, who are objects in all this, are as messed up as streetwalker prostitutes. Anyone who tries to claim that "only rarely" they get abused is deluding themselves, because research proves otherwise without any shadow of a doubt. However, in the porn-dominated media, porn-related research doesn't get much air-time, unless it "proves" that porn is great. Every time a piece of research or a personal story comes out, from a porn actress or a prostitute, speaking about just how abused and raped she was during her job, and all the valid reasons she couldn't get out of it for period of time, most male commentators start to ridicule them, pretend that they are lying, seeking attention etc. I've seen it million times. I adore men, I adore people in general. And I don't hold anyone responsible for centuries of female suffering. However, porn is a continuation of that trend, women are still abused and objectified. and that's a pretty far cry from chocolate, don't you think?
Not all of us want to curb non-violent, concensual porn. Now you know I'm not saying filling every orifice is the same as munching a choc bar. What I said was, cocoa farmers are being exploited left right and centre so we can have cheap coffee and mars bars while others are well protected under fair trade. It's the same as the porn industry. Some are treated like royalty, others worse than dogs in Korea. The point being, do we ban a whole industry because large numbers are being mistreated? Nobody pays a blind bit of notice when Bangladeshi buildings fall down while poor sewing machinists are making our £2 t-shirts for primark, should we shut down the whole garment industry? Of course not but porn will never ever ever go away in any form. Govts will not put enough resources into fighting violent porn, snuff movies, child rape because there is no profit in it. I am totally behind you on all you say about sex crimes but I don't think straight up porn is to blame. I have no doubt horrible horrible things happen everyday, that men and women, young girls and boys, teenage and even babies are kidnapped and sold into sex slavery every single day. There is also a well policed side to it. Maybe some of it should come with a fair trade type sticker on the box or banner on the site?
I was unaware that female porn stars were forced into their profession If this is the case, wouldn't all sex porn be filmed rape? Are strippers porn stars? I had a girlfriend who wanted nothing more than for me to push her lady parts into her chest cavity with hard, pneumatic machine style fucking. I'll give her a ring and let her know only porn stars like that kind of sex and she is only objectifying women one man at a time.
That's fair enough. But I'd say that at least 50% of us does. So perhaps there's a happy medium? We are always more or less in agreement and this is not an exception. But I was trying to make a different point. Sex is vastly different than any object, and sexual assault and exploitation is specifically damaging. This thread isn't long enough for me to explain why, but it's a well known fact and loads of info exists about it. What I'm trying to say is that there's very little porn out there that doesn't involve some form of abuse or another. It may not be obvious from the movie (although mostly it is). There are so many ways in which one can be exploited in the porn industry (again, loads of info is available if you search for it). Estimations that were made a few times were that less than 20% of available porn on the net is confirmed to be abuse-free. That's my problem with this situation. I think it'll take a lot of effort to regulate porn industry in a meaningful way. I hope it happens at some point Fairtrade porn. Even that sounds dodgy [MENTION=53984]Garball[/MENTION]: Your comment is proof that no matter how carefuly one tries to explain something, there'll always be people who'll misunderstand. Sigh.
So....If the porn industry didn't exist, all the people involved would be stand-up citizens? I think it is obvious everybody disagrees with criminal acts of human trafficking, rape, child molestation, etc. We would all be happy to see those people placed burlap sacks with broken bottles and pushed down steep hills. The question that remains is the problem with legitimate/legal porn. It has been said that it only exploits and abuses women. Did those women not choose to enter the industry on their own accord? Are they not aware of the scenes they are about to partake in? Are the men not exploited? Is it feminist dismissiveness that male porn stars are in it for the sake of getting to have sex all the time and the women are all victims. How many commercials are there for penis enlargement and stamina? Is that not related to the inadequate feeling caused by the Pringles cans dangling from male porn stars? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mY711HJK7pg
I don't think anybody claimed that all porn stars are forced into their profession. Or if someone did, I missed that particular post. I don't think anybody has claimed that either. But, again, I may have just missed it. Who has said this? Quite a few women do not choose to enter the industry on their own accord (there are many ways to force / coerce a woman into porn and most don't even involve a gun pointed at their heads) and, again, quite a few are scammed into the profession. For instance, Victor Malarek's 'Natashas' discusses several instances where East-European girls were offered various jobs abroad ranging from glamour models to dancers to housekeepers and au pairs and instead were trafficked off to fuck 20 men a day, every day in a shitty brothel somewhere in Israel (as well as Saudi-Arabia, the US, and many other countries, even Finland), some working as 'just' prostitutes while some ended up on video as well. Naturally men too are exploited, when it comes to the sex industry, but not on the same scale as women. That's why the exploitation of women in the industry gets more attention.
[MENTION=45548]Selbbin[/MENTION], I think I know which bit you mean, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but I didn't really see it as an absolute statement, i.e. that porn exploits and abuses only women.
One thing I genuinely didn't expect when clicking on this topic, considering how liberal this forum is, was people arguing for banning/curbing porn. Aren't you people supposed to be in favor of social freedom, a woman being free with her sexuality without being labeled, and a woman's right to do what she wants with her body without being oppressed by the male partriarchy, and all that jazz? Then again, logical consistency has always been seen as an enemy of modern liberalism, and naturally, an instrument of that nefarious partriarchy. Anyways, Internet porn has had many far-reaching effects on society (including something as random as lower ratings for televised beauty pageants!), many good, and some bad. But the last thing I want is the motherfucking government dictating to me what I can and can't watch on my laptop. And for the record, I usually like my porn extremely rough and violent.
By the way, I was acquainted with a black male pornstar in his late 30s back when I was training BJJ in LA County. While he was well-read, intelligent, handsome, well-built, witty, charming, and had a large black dick, he was also a basket-case who suffered from self-loathing, numerous personal demons, and frequent thoughts of suicide. He had a lot of really interesting things to say/write about the porn industry, too.
My own feeling is, the more you hide stuff away, the more people are going to want it. I wish the government would do more to hunt down and prosecute the people who force vulnerable men, women and children into participating in porn videos against their will—instead of slapping a blanket ban on the internet, so 'breast' cancer or medically-related pictures of genitals, or adult-consent erotica gets blocked. The folk who want to watch child porn will find a way ...unless the makers of it get stopped.
Since it's about as hard to ban porn as it is to ban prostitution, I believe the best we can do is try to alter society in ways that would make abuse / trafficking etc. of sex workers of any kind as difficult and unlucrative as possible. But it seems like that too is a mere utopia; abuse is here to stay pretty much as long as humans exist. However, that's not to say that we shouldn't try to work towards realizing that utopia, even if we'd never actually reach it. Then again, if a few high-ranking government bodies were subjected to hours of daily anal pounding, whether they felt like it or not, they'd probably make the issue a higher priority in a heartbeat. Money talks and all that...
Glad you mentioned prostitution. As abhorrent as I find it, I would legalize that, too. (And numerous places, like Germany and certain parts of Nevada, already do) In fact, legalizing it means governments can tax it for additional revenue, and it becomes safer, more sanitary, and well-regulated for workers and customers alike, as opposed to rife with abuse, corruption, and criminals. (Prohibition, anyone?) Penn Jillette, who I have very similar political/social opinions to, had an excellent episode of "Bullshit" on this very subject.
I watched one documentary about brothels in Nevada a long time ago, purely by chance. Suppose the makers had an anti-prostitution agenda as opposed to neutral or merely observational (if that's even possible with such a triggering subject), but some of the places were still run by crime syndicates, the prostitutes were not allowed to leave the brothel (apart from walks in the yard), the work hours were insane (or in their case, the amount of customers they were to serve), and even the medical care provided was sub-par. Allegedly there were also girls who were coerced into the job. I know that's not always the case, just thought I'd mention this. Prostitution seems to be a honey pot for illegal activities and abuse, even when legalized. In Finland, it raised hubbub when several young, Finnish women spoke to the press about how they finance their studies with prostitution. It's dangerous of course; not only the customers can turn out to be of the unstable type, but criminals don't like freelancers on their turf either. It's actually rather astounding that young women take the risk when there are ways to support oneself legally as well. Of course, you'll make less and work more if you finance your studies as a super market clerk, but still. After all, Finland does have a pretty good support system for students (and the unemployed), so it's not like one is downright cornered to become a prostitute. Sorry, rambly, and I went OT. Again.
Perhaps this is a bit out of place since I consider myself to be more of a libertarian than liberal, but I took to libertarianism specifically because it appealed to me as a mathematician; I start with a single, very simple, belief - an axiom, if you will - and from this belief I use logic to reason my way to a conclusion, and then I include that conclusion in my collection of opinions, values, and views. Many times I've reached a conclusion that's contradicted my previous beliefs, and I alterened them accordingly. Men who watch porn make for a vast majority of the male population. It is also not shoved down everyone's throat, not all the time, barely even once. It's just a few clicks away, but those clicks are almost always voluntary. Then perhaps one should ask oneself why porn is so popular? Perhaps it is because a lack of sexual contention in real life: then perhaps the solution is not to ban porn, but to move society to a direction where sex is not so controversial or shame riddled, and also where it isn't valued so much - there are those who feel that life does revolve around sex. You have no authority to define universally what normal is or what type of sexual intercourse is considered sane. There are women with partners who have sex with others than their partners, so called "cheating", and I'd wager that the distribution of male and female "cheaters" is about equal. If you do need porn for arousal to have sex, then perhaps something *is* wrong, but you do not have the authority to determine whether this is wrong or not. Your view on this matter is quite narrow. I say narrow because you fail to acknowledge that pornography has its negative impacts on some men as well - men who feel inferior because they do not look as attractive as many male porn actors (here, the definition of attractive is based on social norms, and may differ on the individual level as well as a cultural level); men who feel inferior because their penis is smaller than what is normally depicted in porn; men who feel inferior because they do not sleep with women who they find are as attractive as the ones they see in porn; men who feel inferior because they are not desired by women as much as female porn actors are depicted to desire their male co-actors; men who feel inferior because their success in women is significantly less than they would like it to be (or at least think it should be). If you think that women were safer twenty, fifty or even a hundred years ago, then you are probably wrong, almost regardless of what country you refer to. You seem to ignore the fact that many women also have requirements on the men they wish to establish an intimate or sexual relationship with. Especially in sexual relationships, how attractive they find the men plays an important role, and so men attend gyms a lot, consume various nutrition supplements and also alter their diet to become more attractive. Many even take up an education and a professional career they may not enjoy because they think it will increase their chances to attract a woman, and there is always the pressure that, by social convention and other reasons, they should initiate contact with women and are essentially responsible for convincing the woman that he is worthy of engaging in sexual intercourse with her. I personally feel that porn can be problematic, but I acknowledge that one major cause of its popularity is undoubtedly a lack of sex on the consumer of porn.
