Pornography: Evil or alright?

[Don Corleone]

Just because women make more than men doesn't mean they're not victimized. It doesn't mean they are either. I'm asking the question, not pontificating (for once, it can be done!) I definitely agree with Gawain's comments from last night that it's unfair to talk about the 'victim's' in this being solely women. It's probably a little bit easier for uneducated healthy American men to find a sustainable wage doing something a little more conventional, but that doesn't mean women can't too....

Okay, I think I'm hearing a majority of the group say they don't think the actresses & the actors are victims. I haven't heard much dissent from the other side.

Okay, well, do you think society as a whole gets victimized? Porn allows women and men viewers to make their fantasies (which arguably, at times are unhealthy) one step closer to reality. Do the walls of reality start to break down as you approach them? If seeing somebody verbally degraded as some sort of 'foreplay' excites you, does it encourage you to proceed that way in your own life?

Does seeing casual encounters develop into steamy sessions come to put a certain expectation of MOS (or MSS for that matter) that you meet and find attractive?

Also, not to beat a dead horse, but just to revisit the whole idea of who's doing what and why...

The #1 theme in American porn (can't speak for other parts of the world) is lesbian porn. As special interests go, it is the #1 by far. When interviewed in magazines or on camera, to promote their careers, most actresses talk about how much they really get into other women, and how they love the fact that porn opened that side of their sexuality. Now remember, even off camera (as far as the movie goes) the actress is selling herself as your fantasy. It ain't so hot to watch Jenna Jameson do her stuff if in the back of your mind you were thinking "aah, she's faking it." But here comes the kicker... an anonymous survey of pornstars in Hollywood and Florida found that most are not homosexual or even bisexual. To them, they're engaging in a practice they do not particularly enjoy, because they want to get paid. Most retired pornstars confirm this. I might gripe about my job forcing me to do things I don't want to do, but even when that's not just a rant, thankfully, I'm not compromising things so dear to me as my sexual identity. I think it's a little disingenous to just say "well, every job has it's ups and downs" (no pun intended). And just to be fair, I think it goes double for gay porn. A lot of the male actors are in their own minds, strictly hetero.

[hrvojej]

As long as all participants are of legal age and totally consenting, I in principle have no problem with it. However, I can't say I watched much of it at all since my teens.

I guess the only version of porn where one can safely claim that there is no victimization involved are the cases when exhibitionist couples photograph/film themselves in the act and knowingly and willingly distribute it later. At least you can be sure they are having fun.

[Proletariat]

Okay, I think I'm hearing a majority of the group say they don't think the actresses & the actors are victims. I haven't heard much dissent from the other side.

Gimme a minute. I wanna warm up, first.

Okay, well, do you think society as a whole gets victimized?

This is the biggest misconception about these so called 'victimless' crimes. Sure, someone smoking pot, shooting up, paying for sex, or watching goats fondle pastries individually hurts nothing. But when you have a society of hedonism, it leads to depravity and cultural decay. Like Panzer said, moderation, moderation, moderation. Even a group needs this balance.

A nice debauched weekend in Amsterdam would've been wonderful when I was in high school, or maybe even some other time. It has it's place. But can you imagine a whole planet living like that? The idea makes me sick.

Anyway, back to porn. Porn is like just about any other seedy industry. For the most part, it's not that big of a deal. But to deny the victimization of it's stars and starlets is just foolish. While there is a chicken-egg relationship between this industry and the types that are attracted to seek employment by it, over looking the 'evil' aspects of the industry is a little naive.

It's not just a 'a bunch of people getting off and getting paid so don't hate fewls' type thing. There's lots of manipulation and taking advantage.

I really wish I could find an interview some girl named 'Belladonna' did on Dateline a few years ago. Her tale was horrifying about how she compromised herself and kept coming back for more. It included one awful story about a movie she was in that sent her packing for year. And apparently she's one of the 'household' names of porn.

Also, I'm not judging anyone here who watches porn. I've watched a small bit myself (with the right company) but probably not as much as you prurient, bunch of lewds. But let's not pretend it's just some big, fun pastime with no consequences to any involved.

[Kanamori]

"But let's not pretend it's just some big, fun pastime with no consequences to any involved."

Amen, I would like to see more explicit laws trying to protect against the manipulation - contracts meant to trick them or what have you - of the "actors".

[bmolsson]

The word victim is really interesting here. If you see a woman in a porno movie as a victim, what is then a soldier in Iraq ?
The prostitute don't want to get beaten or get HIV, neither does the soldier want to get killed in action or end up as a hostage at a terrorist group.
In all jobs and activities you have to be cautious and there are always risks you need to assess. In the end, the adult individual is in full control of his/her body and have to make the decisions they believe is best for them.

[Don Corleone]

You know Bmolsson, that's a very interesting viewpoint. I hadn't thought about it quite like that.

[Beirut]

Amen, I would like to see more explicit laws trying to protect against the manipulation - contracts meant to trick them or what have you - of the "actors".

I can't imagine any contract that says "the party of the first part will perform intercourse with the party of the second part" would last ten seconds in any court in the US. Except in California of course.

Then again... can an adult fim star be in breach of contract for not (insert imaginative sexual act here) as described on paper and signed by them? Other than being fired, what do you do to them? Sue them?

The other person says in court "Your Honour, I got ******!" Then the judge says, "Um, not according to your testimony you didn't."

[English assassin]

I can see where Proletariat is coming from, but I don't think the argument can be taken too far.

First, we are all taking it as a given that consent is essential. But the trouble with worrying about "manipulation" (pun unintended) is its a much trickier concept. Put plainly, a drug addict may be doing porn to feed her habit, but a drug addicts consent is still a consent. An actress may want to limit her role in a film to, I don't know, straight boy on girl sex, but when the slease making the film says she won't get a part (pun unintended) unless she also does, say, girl on girl, her decision to do that, or not, is still a consent.

Basically we all agree to do things that in a completely free world we wouldn't do. I would never have left science for the legal world if it wasn't for all the extra wedge lawyers are paid. Was I manipulated? More importantly, can I complain?

Basically if you are too down on porn what you are saying is that the actresses (and actors) have no right to sell pictures of themselves having sex. That's taking a valuable asset away from them. It can be OK to do that, but it needs a strong justification.

Where I thought the argument might go was the effect of the interviews in which the actresses say things like " I just love (insert various "advanced" sexual practices here) with strangers and I think most girls do." Now, at the ripe old age of 35 I have come to accept that in fact most women are NOT amoral bisexual nymphomaniacs (this is not wholly a bad thing, its quite comforting to think I can go home tonight and find my wife has spent the day looking after the children rather than having threeway sex with the postman and the woman next door). But what do 16 year old boys think? And what do 16 year old girls think when 16 year old boys pressure them to do all the stuff they see in porn "because everyone must be doing it"? I mean, its not exactly like finding a Playboy that your dad "accidentally" left out on his bedroom floor any more is it?

And it does have effects. I gather from an interview I read on London's vice trade that whereas not so long ago most working girls could restrict their menu to pretty mainstream stuff, (shall we say stuff that would be grounds for a divorce if your husband/wife wouldn't deliver and leave it at that) now its simply accepted that everyone has to agree to more or less anything.

Also on a purely practical level I would like my children to be able to go on the internet without discovering about (insert various "advanced" sexual practices here) at the age of 9.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Arent all workers manipulated?

[Ronin]

Arent all workers manipulated?

Gawain....how communist of you

[Kanamori]

Porno actresses and actors tend not to be shining examples of intellect and ability. Lower class people tend to be unfairly, compared to how other workers are taken advantage of, manipulated in the armed forces and pornos, because of where the abuse can go and how suseptible they are, given that, like it or not, people in the Army (not Navy and Airforce) and pron industry tend to be less educated.

[Proletariat]

Nevermind.

[Productivity]

I dont agree with this statement Im afraid...

Its a well known fact that a female 'star' on her first day of 'work' will earn more than the most popular male 'star'. And is probably one of the very few (if any) industries where that is the case.

I dont really consider that victimisation.

I refer you to my post. I'm struggling to class that as anythign other than victimisation. The fact that she didn't mind/liked it in the end is irrelevant. There will be plenty who don't, but are forced to stay through their own situations.

[Big_John]

I refer you to my post. I'm struggling to class that as anythign other than victimisation. The fact that she didn't mind/liked it in the end is irrelevant. There will be plenty who don't, but are forced to stay through their own situations.

are you refering to her childhood/teenage years (being beaten for not getting good grades, runny away, etc.)? because other than that, i don't see the victimization you are refering to.

[GoreBag]

I would disagree with Corleone's statement about lesbian porn. I wouldn't say it's the most popular form of porn in North America. It probably was at one time, though.

I watched a documentary once about a male porn star who got addicted to heroin at one point in his career and worked in porn in order to feed his habit, but he was clean (so to speak) when he started to work in the industry.

I think laws that limit types of pornography, much like the anti-child pornography laws, serve only to keep the things they hope to ban alive. "The only way to ensure something survives is to repress it". Besides, an outlet like porn is much safer than having someone commit the crimes themselves. I don't agree with persecuting men who go to Thailand for sex with kids, though. If it's not legal in Thailand, and even if it isn't, their home nation has no real argument to be creating consequences for someone's breaking of the law in another country.

[Dîn-Heru]

As with most things, it depends.

Studies on the effects of of pornography tends to focus on sexual violence, ie the woman first resisting, then giving in and finally begging for more. These studies sugesst that viewing such material can distort one's perceptions of how women actually respond to sexual coercion and increase men's agression against women, atleast in laboratory settings.

(I can give examples of some of these studies, but it will have to wait until tomorrow evening, because I am studying for my exams these days. So the only sparetime is in the evenings)

But like some here has said it is not bad in itself, at least as long as it does not depict a "rape/ submissive (inferior) female" scenario. So as long as it shows one or more concenting adults on equal terms, I do not see anything wrong with it.

[Beirut]

But like some here has said it is not bad in itself, at least as long as it does not depict a "rape/ submissive (inferior) female" scenario. So as long as it shows one or more concenting adults on equal terms, I do not see anything wrong with it.

I agree with the rape part, but what's wrong with the submissive female scenario?

Sounds bloody A1 fine to me! On film and in real life. And what's with this equal terms business? Maybe when it's paycheck time or at the civil rights checkout counter, but not in the bedroom brother. That's the lion's den.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to my Male Chauvenist Club meeting.

[GoreBag]

I agree with the rape part, but what's wrong with the submissive female scenario?

Sounds bloody A1 fine to me! On film and in real life. And what's with this equal terms business? Maybe when it's paycheck time or at the civil rights checkout counter, but not in the bedroom brother. That's the lion's den.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to my Male Chauvenist Club meeting.

I wouldn't say it's chauvinism. Every girl with whom I have discussed it has admitted to having "the rape fantasy". To say that women are submissive is a just a generalisation, but it is my experience that they are, sexually, for the most part.

[Productivity]

are you refering to her childhood/teenage years (being beaten for not getting good grades, runny away, etc.)? because other than that, i don't see the victimization you are refering to.

She wasn't victimized later on because she happened to like it. The extrapolation is that htere would be those who did not like, and then they are the ones who are victimized.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Studies on the effects of of pornography tends to focus on sexual violence, ie the woman first resisting, then giving in and finally begging for more. These studies sugesst that viewing such material can distort one's perceptions of how women actually respond to sexual coercion and increase men's agression against women, atleast in laboratory settings.

I dont know that rape is allowed in porn movies here in the US. Ive watched thousands and cant remember a one. Its fine in regular movies though. Strange is it not? In fact it far far more prevelant in R rated movies than XXX. You also can no longer have bondage and sex in the same scene or beastiality. At least here in NY. I dont know if its a national law.

[Big_John]

She wasn't victimized later on because she happened to like it.

ok, so it wasn't victimization then.

The extrapolation is that htere would be those who did not like, and then they are the ones who are victimized.

i don't understand what you are referring to though; what is the potential victimization (i mean can you give me an example)? why is it contingent upon the participant enjoying it? lots of people don't enjoy their jobs, does that make them victims? i mean, i hated my first job way back moping floors.. was i being victimized by safeway? if so, can i sue them???

[Beirut]

You also can no longer have bondage and sex in the same scene or beastiality. At least here in NY.

New York without beastiality?

That's like London without fog.

[bmolsson]

So as long as it shows one or more concenting adults on equal terms, I do not see anything wrong with it.

Well, we should sit when we pee too huh......

[Productivity]

i don't understand what you are referring to though; what is the potential victimization (i mean can you give me an example)? why is it contingent upon the participant enjoying it? lots of people don't enjoy their jobs, does that make them victims? i mean, i hated my first job way back moping floors.. was i being victimized by safeway? if so, can i sue them???

But you came to them didn't you? They didn't realise you were a isolated young kid who they could persuade/trick into doing things which you may very well not want to do did they?

The victimisation occurs when they take someone who is obviously isolated, and in trouble and use that as a lever to get them into the erotic business.

[Big_John]

well, you make it sound like an abduction dgb. i don't share this belief. undoubtedly, there may be some people that felt as if they had no prospects in life, and were approached by pornographers offering them a way to make more money than they were used to. i think it's more than a stretch to call this victimization.

for one thing, what exactly is being taken from such a person? it's not as if they're being robbed or raped. they're being paid. if they don't like what they're doing, they can stop, afaik. if they choose to use that pay to support a drug habit, or to buy a gun and blow their brains out.. they are victims of themselves, their own choices, not the porn industry.

are they being taken advantage of in some sense? maybe, depends on the person i guess. but how does this differ from any occupation? is anyone who settles for some shit job because they don't feel like they can do anything else a victim?

i have a hard time buying this idea that someone is being "tricked" into having sex on camera when they really don't want to do this. they may regret it later, sure, and they may have been in a vulnerable emotional state when they agreed to get paid for it. imo, this is not a victim of anyone but themselves and their own shortcomings. maybe it's just a difference of definition.

[Dîn-Heru]

I agree with the rape part, but what's wrong with the submissive female scenario?

I wrote inferior in parentaces (sp?) because I was not sure if submissive was the right word to use, because what I was thinking about was the notion that women do not want to have sex and are subject to the will of a man.

If a female chooses to be submissive, then by all means congratulations to you.

As for the equal terms, I meant that all involved are free to choose the level of submisivness/assertiveness.

Personally, I just don't like to see women treated like pieces of meat, although I am probably quilty of thinking like this at times as well.

Well, we should sit when we pee too huh......

(For the serious reply look above.)

Well that depends too, if you have a very, how shall we put it, strongminded woman who dislike you missing bowl, then it would probably be a good idea for you to sit. But other than that I see no reason to change our ways, unless you have very poor aim...

[Beirut]

Personally, I just don't like to see women treated like pieces of meat, although I am probably quilty of thinking like this at times as well.

Well you don't just treat them like a piece of meat, you treat them like filet mignon; a very expensive, top of the line, delicious piece of meat.

I constantly tell my sweetie she's Prime Rib.

(And she constantly tells me I'm an idiot.)