# Pornography



## Julia (15 September 2011)

This evening I heard part of an ABC Radio interview with someone from the ABC Religion and Ethics Department.  This person was quoting Robert Manne and Clive Hamilton whom he said had been speaking out against the pr0n industry.

The suggestion was that not only is pornography an abuse of those who participate in the making of it, but also that it debases those who choose to view it.

What is your response to this suggestion?

(Please, I'm hoping to avoid smart comments about anyone's personal activities, and instead hoping more for any thoughtful comment about individual freedoms versus the nanny state. )

I should add that there was nothing said about reviving the apparently now defunct internet filter:  rather it was a more general discussion about the role of pornography in society.

Moderators:  could you kindly correct the typo in the heading of the thread?  I went to edit it when I noticed it but apparently I can only edit the body of the post and not the title which does seem a bit unfortunate.


----------



## sptrawler (15 September 2011)

There is definitely a place for it, when a guy is young it takes up a great deal of his life.
As he ages he wonders what all the excitement was about.
A bit like politics.


----------



## basilio (15 September 2011)

It's a big conversation... 

Sex is at the core of life. Obviously and literally without sex we wouldn't be here. So it's no surprise that our sex appetites have been genetically designed to ensure we go forth and multiply.

Where does this place erotica and pornography ? I make the distinction because erotica is  supposed to be somewhat sensitive, hopefully "artistic" and  perhaps meaningful in the sense of exploring more total relationships. pr0n is supposedly just tacky in your face sex with no pretense to exploring more than relatively mindless sex.

I think we have created exceptionally real problems with the explosion of pornography over the past 30 years. There is plenty of evidence that the pr0n explosion has

1) *Desensitized viewers  sexuality.* Essentially it now takes more and more gross sexual behavior to get a reaction. As a result there has been an explosion of sicker and sicker pornography.

2) *Has created completely unreal images of what men and women should look like and how they should behave.* Consider how women and now men have decided to defoliate everything to achieve the new clean pr0n look. And going one step further women are now looking to genital surgery to make themselves look as neat and tidy as the (airbrushed !) pr0n stars. 

3) *Normalised sexual behavior that not that long ago would have been considered gross. *  Anal sex, group sex, very casual sex, sex in toilets at bars.  I suggest that the relentless expansion of pr0n in volume and grossness has affected peoples behavior.

I'll offer one particular example that sticks in my mind. The Jerry Springer show was one of the catalysts of changing peoples attitudes. Jerry would relentlessly produce shows with all sorts of weird and gross characters telling stories of what they did with whoever and how they did it. And all of this was played to a live audience and a broader TV community.
*
It turns out many of Jerrys characters were simply making up these stories*. The  shows producers would advertise for people in particular situations ie fathers who seduced their daughters boyfriends or mothers or anything and sure enough up would pop the  characters with that story.  The participants became TV stars and scored a few grand in expenses. But these people then started showing up with different stories in different places and it became clear they were just acting and  exaggerating roles  ! 

The punch line is that social surveys of people in New York indicated that after a few years of watching this made up drivel peoples attitudes towards the normality of  extreme behaviors changed. It looked as if that seeing all these examples of totally mad ****ers created new "normals" for many people. And so their behaviors changed accordingly. Life imitated art.


----------



## LostMyShirt (15 September 2011)

Basilo;

I could not agree more. I won't take up space here regurgitating your response. I agree on all points.

Julia; The speaker certainly has a point. Over time some very strange erotica has hit the scene. I would say that there is exploitation going on with _some_ people, desperate for a buck, and thrust into an extremely dirty piece of film.


----------



## So_Cynical (16 September 2011)

I like pr0n and use it often.


----------



## skc (16 September 2011)

pr0n's contribution to the tech industry.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...onised-technology-1749247.html?action=Gallery


----------



## LifeChoices (16 September 2011)

Julia said:


> The suggestion was that not only is pornography an abuse of those who participate in the making of it, but also that it debases those who choose to view it.
> 
> What is your response to this suggestion?




Sexuality is a beautiful thing.

Sex has had a really bad rap for at least 10 years. Of course there is really bad stuff that goes on. But AFAIC only sick people go there. I enjoy looking at images of beautiful human bodies.

Make love not war.


----------



## noco (16 September 2011)

What's new? ......... It has been happening for centuries and will go on for centuries to come.

Make a visit to the ruins of POMPEII (1700 years ago). You will see plenty on the inner walls. They even had a brothel there.


----------



## tech/a (16 September 2011)

All people fortunately are wired very differently
Some to the extreme in liberal thinking and action
Others Armish.

pr0n has been and always will be with us.
So too will be the opposing views.

Personally there's not a lot I disagree with.
But to be perfectly balanced I'll look into it further and report back sometime next year.
As they say to be an expert in anything takes around 10000 hrs.


----------



## skc (16 September 2011)

tech/a said:


> All people fortunately are wired very differently
> Some to the extreme in liberal thinking and action
> Others Armish.
> 
> ...




I thought you made the funniest post of the year yesterday when you stared at the expired SPI contract for half an hour.

This is funnier.


----------



## tech/a (16 September 2011)

skc said:


> I thought you made the funniest post of the year yesterday when you stared at the expired SPI contract for half an hour.
> 
> This is funnier.




Yes I think I need a change of things to stare at!


----------



## Sdajii (16 September 2011)

noco said:


> What's new? ......... It has been happening for centuries and will go on for centuries to come




So what if it's old? Rape, murder, cancer and back pain are all even older.

I'm not saying that makes pornography any better or worse, I'm just going off topic and being a petty logic policeman.

On topic, I'm pretty 'middle ground' on the issue. I would never condone anything too extreme being made (child pr0n for example), I think you would cause far more trouble than you would prevent by entirely banning it. I'm not really familiar with how pr0n has changed over time, but I'm guessing if it is getting more extreme it is at least partly the culture's demand driving the product rather than the product entirely driving the cultural change. I think soft pr0n has more to do with changing the culture. pr0n is any material designed to get a sexual response. Most of our culture in western cultures seems to think that as long as no nipples or genitals are visible, visual material is 'not pr0n' and so kids get exposed to it, everywhere; billboards, magazines, shop window posters, it's endless. You don't need to show 'bits' to deliver strong messages, and I think it's the 'innocent' pr0n which is Doing most of the change, starting with the children. The perception is very different when they are immersed in it (the attitude, not exposure too seeing 'bits' which itself is meaningless).

When it comes to what is and isn't 'pr0n', and what types change attitudes, most people missundetstand the issue so fully, it really astounds me.


----------



## prawn_86 (16 September 2011)

Personally i think if it is between 2 consenting adults, then if they choose to film themselves (and get paid for it) doing whatever it is, thats fine by my. Everyone has different tastes etc, so its a horses for courses type of thing.

I do agree with Basilio however that it has definitely desensitized viewers and created unrealistic sexual expectations, especially among my generation.


----------



## Surly (16 September 2011)

prawn_86 said:


> Personally i think if it is between 2 consenting adults, then if they choose to film themselves (and get paid for it) doing whatever it is, thats fine by my. Everyone has different tastes etc, so its a horses for courses type of thing.
> 
> I do agree with Basilio however that it has definitely desenstized viewers and created unrealistic sexual expections, especially among my generation.




I was just about to type this word for word.

We do not need to be protected from ourselves.

cheers
Surly


----------



## Logique (16 September 2011)

Senator Conroy will decide what we may or may not see on the internet. And how much we'll pay to connect to it. And Senators Brown and Brown/Rhiannon the decisions on which newspapers are appropriate for us to read.


----------



## basilio (16 September 2011)

Julia wanted to talk the discussion to questions of personal freedom versus "the nanny state" with regard to pornography.

It's going to be impossible to put the genie back in the bottle. The internet and billions of digital cameras, recorders ect mean that anyone and everyone could produce or access pr0n.

But lets remember that some years ago society decided that the possession of child pornography was essentially evil. The view of (the nanny state ?) was that child pr0n was obviously destroying the lives of affected children and perhaps by extension contributing to the exploitation of other children by viewers who after continual exposure to child pr0n decided its "normal" and ok.  This goes back to my earlier comment that continual presentation of acts and behaviour do have an affect on viewers perception of what is doable. 

One of the facets of much of current pr0n is the extreme nature of the acts involved. Forget normal sex. Think about double penetration, huge insertions, ass to mouth sex. 

These are brutal acts which are passed off as consensual sex.  The inevitable outcome for the young pr0n star is they are physically wrecked in a short period of time. End of story.  A few months,  perhaps a  year of pretty brutal activities and they are finished.

I said earlier that the huge amount of pr0n has desensitized people and created a need for stronger and more graphic images. That has meant that pr0n producers have to leave "vanilla sex" activity behind and demand their actors accept more violent and extreme behaviors to continue working.

So the question can be asked. *How acceptable is it for "the nanny state" to allow a workplace to physically endanger the health of their workers ? If we have now accepted that industries shouldn't  endanger the health of workers, customers and the broader environment with their operations should we apply this to the pr0n industry* ?

If you can hack it,  have a read of how pr0n stars are treated and what they endure. The second link identifies how scores of people in pr0n have died.

http://www.shelleylubben.com/pornstars

http://www.shelleylubben.com/dead-pr0n-stars


----------



## prawn_86 (16 September 2011)

basilio said:


> So the question can be asked. *How acceptable is it for "the nanny state" to allow a workplace to physically endanger the health of their workers ? If we have now accepted that industries shouldn't  endanger the health of workers, customers and the broader environment with their operations should we apply this to the pr0n industry* ?]




I haven't read the article yet, but i will tonight. 

However, the same question can be asked of any physical profession. Sports stars anyone? Average AFL retirment age is 27yo. Im under 25 and never played at a professional level yet my knees are shot and will never be 'normal' again.

I agree that the internet has caused more and more violent/degrading/physical pr0n, but there is obviously a demand for it, and providing people are willing to do it, it's not (or shouldnt be) our place to judge. If it was so bad, they can always say no, and indeed a lot of pornstars will only do certain things such as girl on girl, or no anal etc


----------



## wayneL (16 September 2011)

What is the difference between gratuitous violence and gratuitous sex?

Why does one have a free rein and not the other?

Why does one make us worry (on an official level) about the moral fabric of society and not the other?

Just asking.


----------



## prawn_86 (16 September 2011)

Also, i cant remember where i saw the stat unfortunately, so i cant link to it. But apparently the vast majority of searches conducted online for pr0n was for amateur vids/pics. Most people like the voyourism of watching some other 'normal' couple, and the violent/rough acts the the big name pr0n stars perform is actually not what most people search for


----------



## basilio (16 September 2011)

wayneL said:


> What is the difference between gratuitous violence and gratuitous sex?
> 
> Why does one have a free rein and not the other?
> 
> ...




Probably bugger all Wayne.

I'd suggest both have an affect on how people see reality and behave. This thread  however was focusing on pornography  rather than violence although it's worth noting that much pr0n is overtly violent or even worse, films quite violent, painful acts and pretends that the  actors are enjoying themselves.

_______________________________________________________________________
Prawn if you check out the  reference you'll find that choice  about what they will do for pr0n stars is very illusionary.  In a similar vein I came across another testimony from a manager of a dance club in Amercia which outlined how girls are groomed to become table top dancers and take part in the activities that surround that industry.

http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/Ohio_SB_252.pdf.


----------



## satanoperca (16 September 2011)

basilio said:


> http://www.shelleylubben.com/pornstars
> 
> http://www.shelleylubben.com/dead-pr0n-stars




Those links are really depressing. Actually the whole thread is really depressing.

After working in a Muslim country for many years (i'm not muslim) the one thing that I really enjoyed was the lack of sexual images in public.

When my 4 year old son started referring to woman on the tv as sexy women as started to wonder if the sexualisation of women had gone to far.

I for one don't mind erotic pr0n, actually enjoy watching it from time to time, but it is hard to find. I do not find some 12inch monster **** being rammed into some tiny little woman exciting or thrilling at any level. The thought of what seems to be the latest fad, anal and even worse anal to mouth is just pushing it to far. What is next, beastiality being acceptable. We are distroying our youth by allowing easy access to hardcore pr0n.

Cheers


----------



## satanoperca (16 September 2011)

but reading through the above site, how do you stop the abuse 



> The United States adult film industry produces 4,000–11,000 films a year and earns an estimated $9–$13 billion in gross revenues annually. An estimated 200 production companies employ 1,200–1,500 performers. Performers typically earn $400–$1,000 per shoot and are not compensated based on distribution or sales.




It is not a small business.

Cheers


----------



## prawn_86 (16 September 2011)

I dont disagree that a lot of pr0n stars/table dancer/strippers are 'groomed' due to circumstances etc but i am a firm believer that if someone really dislikes or disagrees with something, they will find a way to get out of it (same as a drug addict getting clean)

The demand is obviously there, so in a free economy supply should meet demand...


----------



## LostMyShirt (16 September 2011)

prawn_86 said:


> I dont disagree that a lot of pr0n stars/table dancer/strippers are 'groomed' due to circumstances etc but i am a firm believer that if someone really dislikes or disagrees with something, they will find a way to get out of it (same as a drug addict getting clean)
> 
> The demand is obviously there, so in a free economy supply should meet demand...




That is incorrect and purely a comment made in hindsight.

The opperunity is there for the desperate - extremely desperate. They are not treated as human beings - rather as tools of the trade. They are not compensated as well as they should, and not given the benifits of a worker.

The performers use drugs and alchohol in order to reduce the stress and traumatic experiences. How you can count this industry as a welcome addition I will never know.

What ever happened to the beautiful playboy spreads? The image of an obviously and exceptionaly beautiful woman who certainly has the goods, treated as a model and not a toy. I know what happened; it was destroyed by the ever increasing appetite of unconventional sexualy activity. 

If the demand for this industry revolves around exceptionaly unorthadox material - then the industry is there to appease the appetites of the sick.

I walked into a Brothel once with a few mates. The girls were parades in the lobby in order for you to pick which one you would have for the evening. I'm not a prude - but when I saw the faces, and looked deep ino the eyes of those people, deep into their soul, I had to leave - I felt their shame. I had a nice smoko outside, and never returned to that place again.


----------



## basilio (16 September 2011)

prawn_86 said:


> I dont disagree that a lot of pr0n stars/table dancer/strippers are 'groomed' due to circumstances etc but i am a firm believer that if someone really dislikes or disagrees with something, they will find a way to get out of it (same as a drug addict getting clean)
> 
> The demand is obviously there, so in a free economy supply should meet demand...




And this is where Julia started this thread Prawn. Should we allow the marketplace to totally dictate what is produced or do Governments as our representatives decide some demands are too destructive to allow industries to be developed to meet them ?

The classic case is hard drugs. We have already talked about child pornography. In some places and at some times people believed poker machines were just clever ways to entice people to empty their wallets into the machines. So they were banned. (Think Victoria until 1990s)

Of course in a neo liberal economy the business view prevails that people should be free to make up their own minds and that as responsible human beings no one is going to allow themselves to be enslaved by something as silly as a poker machine....  (_not unless we can help it of course .!)_ 

Perhaps this  discussion is asking the same question about unrestricted availability of hard core pornography and the overt sexualisation of the media and public spaces.


----------



## McLovin (16 September 2011)

prawn_86 said:


> I dont disagree that a lot of pr0n stars/table dancer/strippers are 'groomed' due to circumstances etc but i am a firm believer that if someone really dislikes or disagrees with something, they will find a way to get out of it (same as a drug addict getting clean)




How many drug addicts have you known? I mean real drug addicts not people who don't mind a line on a Friday night.



prawn_86 said:


> The demand is obviously there, so in a free economy supply should meet demand...




If that's where the bar is set, then let's start a sex trafficking business, you can make tonnes of money and there's definately supply.


----------



## prawn_86 (16 September 2011)

McLovin said:


> How many drug addicts have you known? I mean real drug addicts not people who don't mind a line on a Friday night.
> 
> If that's where the bar is set, then let's start a sex trafficking business, you can make tonnes of money and there's definately supply.




I have known a couple of full blown addicts. One has got clean, the other hasnt. I never said it was easy, but the human mind can accomplish amazing feats if it truly wants/needs to.

I think there needs to be basic human rights (as i mentioned in my 1st post on this thread); sex trafficking wouldn't be consenting adults. Staying on topic, most of these pr0n stars do earn money from *their job*, and therefore have the means to get away from it if they really wanted to.


----------



## Julia (16 September 2011)

wayneL said:


> What is the difference between gratuitous violence and gratuitous sex?
> 
> Why does one have a free rein and not the other?
> 
> ...



Wayne, I'm not sure that we don't worry about gratuitous violence.  It has, however, become so ubiquitous that we perhaps are coming to regard it as 'normal', with consequent results in reality.

Some posters have here posed the suggestion that the similar 'normalisation' of increasingly aggressive and abusive pr0n could likewise be pushing many young people into sexual activity they feel pressured to engage in.




prawn_86 said:


> I dont disagree that a lot of pr0n stars/table dancer/strippers are 'groomed' due to circumstances etc but i am a firm believer that if someone really dislikes or disagrees with something, they will find a way to get out of it (same as a drug addict getting clean)
> 
> The demand is obviously there, so in a free economy supply should meet demand...



That seems logical enough for those of us who do favour a free economy, and - on the precedent I've previously advocated of being totally against restricting access to pokies a la Andrew Wilkie - I'd have to agree.   But I can't ignore a sense of concern about really violent pr0n being available to young people who are still immature and vulnerable to thinking they'll not be accepted by their peer group unless they do whatever some horny young bloke tells them.



basilio said:


> And this is where Julia started this thread Prawn. Should we allow the marketplace to totally dictate what is produced or do Governments as our representatives decide some demands are too destructive to allow industries to be developed to meet them ?
> 
> The classic case is hard drugs. We have already talked about child pornography. In some places and at some times people believed poker machines were just clever ways to entice people to empty their wallets into the machines. So they were banned. (Think Victoria until 1990s)
> 
> ...



To be honest, I'm not exactly sure what I was asking, but your post above probably gets it pretty right.

And herewith my appreciation for people responding with genuine views and avoiding the sort of cheap innuendo filled remarks I feared.


----------



## McLovin (16 September 2011)

prawn_86 said:


> I never said it was easy, but the human mind can accomplish amazing feats if it truly wants/needs to.




The human mind is also human. For some people kicking addiction is near on impossible because of their wiring.



prawn_86 said:


> I think there needs to be basic human rights (as i mentioned in my 1st post on this thread); sex trafficking wouldn't be consenting adults.




Sure it would, they don't drag those girls kicking and screaming across the border, they usually go willingly. It's only after they arrive they're given the bad news, however you can just tell them they either have to make their own way home or they can work for you on minimum wage until they can afford to get home. No human rights broken, free to leave at any time. You could easily make the argument they were coerced or "groomed", but that's not an issue apparently...



			
				prawn_86 said:
			
		

> I dont disagree that a lot of pr0n stars/table dancer/strippers are 'groomed' due to circumstances etc but i am a firm believer that if someone really dislikes or disagrees with something, they will find a way to get out of it


----------



## prawn_86 (16 September 2011)

Julia said:


> That seems logical enough for those of us who do favour a free economy, and - on the precedent I've previously advocated of being totally against restricting access to pokies a la Andrew Wilkie - I'd have to agree.   *But I can't ignore a sense of concern about really violent pr0n being available to young people who are still immature *and vulnerable to thinking they'll not be accepted by their peer group unless they do whatever some horny young bloke tells them.




I think the bolded is probably my biggest apprehension about the whole issue. I am young enough to have grown up with access to it online and hence it has helped shape mine (and my generations) expectations and views of sex.

I think parents need to properly educate their children with respect to what is 'normal' and that a lot of pr0n is just 'for show' so to speak and doesnt actually occur in the bedroom, however i know this is easier said than done when it come to talking to teenage children


----------



## bandicoot76 (16 September 2011)

i believe the pr0n issue is like anything else... in moderation its fine... its when it starts getting pushed to the extremes that you start getting serious problems! 

its abit like a playboy centrefold girl being compared to a snuff film... both classed as pr0n but where one is acceptable the other certainly isnt and lets hope never will be!


----------



## Calliope (16 September 2011)

Julia said:


> This evening I heard part of an ABC Radio interview with someone from the ABC Religion and Ethics Department.  This person was quoting Robert Manne and Clive Hamilton whom he said had been speaking out against the pr0n industry.




When a pair of loony left wing-nuts like Manne and Hamilton are against something, I would be very suspicious of their motives. They also oppose freedom of the press. Perhaps book burning will be next on their agenda.


----------



## basilio (16 September 2011)

But, Calliope , what do you think about the issue of  the  widespread  production and viewing of extreme pornography ?  Do you think it's a problem for individuals and the broader community ? 

If it is a problem what do you think we should consider doing ? ( _And  I agree - there are no simple easy answers to that question._)


----------



## prawn_86 (16 September 2011)

basilio said:


> But, Calliope , what do you think about the issue of  the  widespread  production and viewing of extreme pornography ?  Do you think it's a problem for individuals and the broader community ?
> 
> If it is a problem what do you think we should consider doing ? ( _And  I agree - there are no simple easy answers to that question._)




I really don't think there is a widespread viewing of extreme pr0n, most people just view typical 'vanilla' pr0n so to speak.

The link below has some interesting (albeit out of date) stats. As you can see "Group Sex" and "XXX" are 10th and 12th respectively by amount of searches conducted, so the vast majority of searches are just seeking 'standard' pr0n.

"Hardcore" titles released have also increased significantly, but one could argue that this is due to more poeple now having internet access then they did 20 yrs ago, so more people able to satisfy their specific desires.

http://internet-filter-review.toptenreviews.com/internet-pornography-statistics.html


----------



## LifeChoices (16 September 2011)

This topic is a bit close to me.

A very long time ago, before the internet and before I had children. In my mid twenty's I  took a very big risk that paid off extremely well.

I brought American performance artist Annie Sprinkle for a theater tour of Australia. She was part of the Adelaide festival and then went on to tour all Australian capitals.

The show was extremely controversial, it was almost shut down in Melbourne during it's season at the Atheneum Theatre - 3AW went nuts. She was the star of numerous hard core sex films in the 70s and documented everything. She explored sexuality, pr0n in all it's forms and produced a one woman show about her life and experiences with pornography. 

In hindsight her show was completely over the top. Between telling her life story. She invited audience members  to bring cameras to the show and take photos of themselves between her huge t1ts - yeah that's me below. She invited them to inspect her vagina with a torch, while it was opened wide with a speculum. At intermission she sold tit prints in the foyer. The show climaxed when everyone in the theater were handed sealed paper cups with a bit of rice in it to shake while she would masturbate and orgasm live on stage. I can't see a show like that ever being performed in Theatres in Australia now.

I will never forget seeing my father face leaving the theatre - he was white.

I love Annie Sprinkle. I think debates like Julia described just work to shut down some of our natural human side. I find it sad that the real ugly stuff has managed to get lumped in with the beautiful stuff that is known as pr0n. 

We need more Annie Sprinkles in this world.


----------



## sptrawler (16 September 2011)

Thanks for sharing, we are all richer for the knowledge.


----------



## disarray (16 September 2011)

people are responsible for their own choices. if someone chooses to get reamed on camera for cash then its (usually) their choice.

maybe they are drug addicted. maybe they were molested as children. that is terrible, but there's plenty of people out there who were addicted to drugs, molested as children, or thrust into bad situations not of their own making, but chose to educate themselves, work hard, and succeed without being prostitutes.

i'm with prawn, let the market decide. humans are a commodity, we always have been, we always will be. if people choose to be wh0res, that's their choice. the only time the state should intervene is in cases of sexual slavery by coercion or when children are involved.


----------



## Wysiwyg (16 September 2011)

LifeChoices said:


> We need more Annie Sprinkles in this world.



Haven't you been grocery shopping recently? Plenty of bush pigs out there.


----------



## LifeChoices (16 September 2011)

sptrawler said:


> Thanks for sharing, we are all richer for the knowledge.




hahaha, I guess I did get a bit carried away.

You know, I've got this other really good idea. I want to open a European style micro bar that can fit 5 people max. I will only serve Gin and Beer. I want to call this bar Life Choices.

Wysiwyg - I think about two weeks ago I took you off my ignore list after those dreadful comments you made about animials - bye buddy.


----------



## Wysiwyg (16 September 2011)

In reply to Julias thread opener, I think pornography should be about the body beautiful. From 18 to 30 ish is the age for the body beautiful to be admired and enjoyed while the form is firm and true. When the sagging and wrinkles appear, the admiration and desire of form fades away.

Young Turks -- Rod Stewart

They held each other tight
As they drove on through the night, they were so exited
We got but one shot of life
Let's take it while we're still not afraid

Because life is so brief
And time is a thief, when you're undecided
And like a fistful of sand
It can slip right through your hands


----------



## Julia (16 September 2011)

Calliope said:


> When a pair of loony left wing-nuts like Manne and Hamilton are against something, I would be very suspicious of their motives. They also oppose freedom of the press. Perhaps book burning will be next on their agenda.



That was my immediate reaction also.  Neither Manne nor Hamilton have any acquaintance with objectivity about anything.

But then I thought about the principle of the prevalence of extreme and violent pornography becoming accepted as 'normal' and (with my heart in my mouth, I admit) decided to canvas the views of the wide range of people on this forum.

Back to Manne and Hamilton:  I'd be more interested in the professional view of e.g. psychiatrists treating people who have been involved in either making or obsessive viewing of violent/extreme pr0n.  I'm not sure what gives either Manne or Hamilton the cloak of expertise in this area.


----------



## Julia (16 September 2011)

LifeChoices said:


> In hindsight her show was completely over the top. Between telling her life story. She invited audience members  to bring cameras to the show and take photos of themselves between her huge t1ts - yeah that's me below. She invited them to inspect her vagina with a torch, while it was opened wide with a speculum. At intermission she sold tit prints in the foyer. The show climaxed when everyone in the theater were handed sealed paper cups with a bit of rice in it to shake while she would masturbate and orgasm live on stage. I can't see a show like that ever being performed in Theatres in Australia now.



Hopefully not.  From your description it sounds simply gross, rather than erotic.



> I find it sad that the real ugly stuff has managed to get lumped in with the beautiful stuff that is known as pr0n.



I don't think it is all being lumped together.   Rather that what once was found to be erotic by most viewers is now being dismissed in favour of extremely violent and probably largely unrealistic sexual behaviour.

No one has addressed the suggestion made by the ABC commentator that the viewing of extreme pornography debases the viewer as much as those involved in the making of it.  Does this seem valid to you?  Or is it a moralistic criticism with no genuine basis?


----------



## LifeChoices (16 September 2011)

Julia said:


> No one has addressed the suggestion made by the ABC commentator that the viewing of extreme pornography debases the viewer as much as those involved in the making of it.  Does this seem valid to you?  Or is it a moralistic criticism with no genuine basis?




Ok, I'll have a crack. 

Why do they assume the people making pornography are debased?

I think there are far more debased people, who hold high positions in the media, politics and banking.



> Hopefully not. From your description it sounds simply gross, rather than erotic.




It was presented as an arts event in legitimate theaters around the country. It wasn't supposed to be erotic, it was provocative - makes you think.


----------



## disarray (16 September 2011)

Julia said:


> No one has addressed the suggestion made by the ABC commentator that the viewing of extreme pornography debases the viewer as much as those involved in the making of it.  Does this seem valid to you?  Or is it a moralistic criticism with no genuine basis?




the ABC commentator can take their moral judgement and shove it up their ar$e. on film. for money.


----------



## sptrawler (16 September 2011)

Jee wiz Julia you have certainly added zing to the forum, well done.


----------



## So_Cynical (16 September 2011)

LifeChoices said:


> This topic is a bit close to me.
> 
> A very long time ago, before the internet and before I had children. In my mid twenty's I  took a very big risk that paid off extremely well.
> 
> ...




Excellent...i have a whole new respect for you. 

I remember that tour and also remember seeing a doco with exerts from that show, and with bits and pieces about Annie's life etc...i clearly remember a man friend of hers appearing in that doco that had a sex change (i think) and used a stainless steel rod inserted into his surgically created penis to simulate a functional erection.

He didn't get wood...he got steel. 

Annie and her friends came across as very genuine and likeable people.


----------



## basilio (16 September 2011)

Bravo Life Choices !! Anne Sprinkle was/is a marvel.  I loved her enthusiasm for sexuality and fun. It was  extreme sexual theatre  and certainly made one think about taking the personal into the public. But I'm equally sure she isn't a fan of gonzo pr0n.

There is no way I am a prude sexually and I certainly havn't lived under a bush.  Sexuality is vibrant and can be outrageous, exhilarating  and hopefully loving.

But that isn't where Julia started this discussion.

The question that was raised on the ABC  show was not about the Annie Sprinkles or Playboy centerfolds of this world. It questioned the debasement of sex to an uglier and darker set of behaviors that is violent, abusive and  deeply hurts the participants - both actors and viewers. The argument - and I suggest reality  - is that these acts are debasing our community and as a community we should recognise this fact and take action.  

But at the same time we want to respect peoples  individual freedoms. It's a challenging  call isn't it  ?

_________________________________________________________________________

Annie Sprinkles story deserves a look.  It's a doozy !

http://anniesprinkle.org/about-annie/the-sprinkle-story/


----------



## LostMyShirt (16 September 2011)

Julia said:


> No one has addressed the suggestion made by the ABC commentator that the viewing of extreme pornography debases the viewer as much as those involved in the making of it.  Does this seem valid to you?  Or is it a moralistic criticism with no genuine basis?




Of-course it has a genuine basis, and though it is "moralistic criticism", it is criticism well directed.

Although I do agree with freedoms, I do not believe any and all appetites should be endeavored to be satisfied. If we appease the cravings of all men and women, it would destroy us. Above all; I believe certain appetites are _created_ through means such as these. 

The question is; where do we stop? There are many materials refused classification within these shores, whose classification laws have been referred to by an adult store owner I know as "archaic".

The desensitization of young folk at an early age may very well develop into abnormal sexual behavior in their adult years.


----------



## McLovin (17 September 2011)

disarray said:


> maybe they are drug addicted. maybe they were molested as children. that is terrible, but there's plenty of people out there who were addicted to drugs, molested as children, or thrust into bad situations not of their own making, but chose to educate themselves, work hard, and succeed without being prostitutes.




Exactly. It's just like the poor, if only they worked a little harder they wouldn't be poor!


----------



## medicowallet (17 September 2011)

McLovin said:


> Exactly. It's just like the poor, if only they worked a little harder they wouldn't be poor!




Society is a wonderful thing.

Standards are always judged on todays expectations, as opposed to yesterdays.

For example "poor" today is quite different to "poor" in the thirties.


Just like sex is different.  

So as long as we are progressing then we are doing great. eg 200 years ago the attitude towards "whhores" was a lot different than today with brothels/sex workers, that, now there is a huge improvement.

This is where the problem lies. pr0n is fine, but it is one of the few things de-evolving. There will always be a market (and should always be) for good quality, pornography that respects its actors, and shows responsibility towards its viewers.

This is where the imbalance lies, and yes, personal choice is something, but there has to be some sort of standard that is acceptable, and currently standards are questionable, and NEED to be questioned.

MW


----------



## disarray (17 September 2011)

McLovin said:


> Exactly. It's just like the poor, if only they worked a little harder they wouldn't be poor!




here's a bandaid for that bleeding heart of yours


----------



## McLovin (17 September 2011)

medicowallet said:


> This is where the problem lies. pr0n is fine, but it is one of the few things de-evolving. There will always be a market (and should always be) for good quality, pornography that respects its actors, and shows responsibility towards its viewers.
> 
> This is where the imbalance lies, and yes, personal choice is something, but there has to be some sort of standard that is acceptable, and currently standards are questionable, and NEED to be questioned.




I agree, there's nothing wrong with pr0n. I do draw the line at exploiting someone even though it may consent. There's a website Bumfights that pays homeless men with alcohol and money to fight eachother and do stupid stunts, it's clearly exploiting those people it films and I tend to see some of the really hardcore pr0n in the same way.


----------



## Calliope (17 September 2011)

Julia said:


> Back to Manne and Hamilton:  I'd be more interested in the professional view of e.g. psychiatrists treating people who have been involved in either making or obsessive viewing of violent/extreme pr0n. * I'm not sure what gives either Manne or Hamilton the cloak of expertise in this area*.




This is some of Manne's *expertise.*


----------



## Julia (17 September 2011)

McLovin said:


> Exactly. It's just like the poor, if only they worked a little harder they wouldn't be poor!



 Not necessarily.  We all have different capacities in terms of intellectual, psychological and physical attributes.  Without being unkind about it, some people are simply inadequate.  Probably a topic for another thread of its own.


----------



## wayneL (17 September 2011)

Julia said:


> Not necessarily.  We all have different capacities in terms of intellectual, psychological and physical attributes.  Without being unkind about it, some people are simply inadequate.  Probably a topic for another thread of its own.




Exactly.

And when you think about it, the comment you refer to is sort of socialist in an @rse about way... ie we can all be rich if we work hard enough (instead of we should all be poor and work for the benefit of all).

Pfffttt bullshyte. It's not how the world works.

Even pr0n works like capitalism... only guys with 12" dicks get a job... only ladies guys would fancy laying get a job. It's MILF, not MIWLF. (Just trying to stay on topic folks  ). 

Same in the real world.

Pornography is the perfect model for capitalism. :

PS if none of the above makes sense, it's because I'm 3 sheets to the wind on Hawkes Bay _vino locale_. :::


----------



## McLovin (17 September 2011)

Julia said:


> Not necessarily.  We all have different capacities in terms of intellectual, psychological and physical attributes.  Without being unkind about it, some people are simply inadequate.  Probably a topic for another thread of its own.




Of course that's true. But social mobility (or the lack of it) is a real thing ie you are extremely likely to die in the class you were born into. Thankfully I wasn't born poor.




			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> And when you think about it, the comment you refer to is sort of socialist in an @rse about way... ie we can all be rich if we work hard enough (instead of we should all be poor and work for the benefit of all).




Not really. It was an observation that people can be poor because of circumstances beyond their control. Nature v nurture etc.


----------



## Smurf1976 (17 September 2011)

I have noting against pr0n depicting normal sexual acts. But exploitation of those who have little real choice is an entirely different story and just not on in my opinion. There are many desperate people in this world, and it's simply wrong from a moral perspective to exploit them.

Generally speaking, I'd consider myself a libertarian and against unnecessary rules and regulations. But I also have a conscience and let's just say don't mention those &^%$#@! pokies around me. I've never been into them, but I have no doubt whatsoever that they are deliberately designed and located so as to exploit the poor, uneducated, lonely and other vulnerable persons. 

Freedom certainly. But deliberate exploitation of others is morally very, very wrong as far as I'm concerned whether through pr0n, pokies or anything else.


----------



## orr (2 October 2011)

This is a link to recent a panel discussion by four people, Kate Holden being one, with an intimate and or highly evolved relationship to subject. Aspects of the discussion aren't particularly well moderated but important research on internet hits offered up and are well worth thinking about considering who's making them and their current position in society and what effect may be the consequence.   

http://www.themonthly.com.au/pr0n-wars-dines-cannold-holden-lumby-3386


----------



## Knobby22 (2 October 2011)

Read in the magazine "New Scientist" this morning that child pr0n of the worst sort is now heavily involved with criminal gangs and has quadrupled over the last 5 years despite heavy arrests of creators and buyers.

I think this is where some pr0n addicts go when they find normal pr0n doesn't excite anymore as they search for depravity. 

It makes me feel sick to think about it. I don't know what the answer is.


----------



## pavilion103 (14 October 2011)

I feel sorry for people who look at pr0n tbh. It's kinda degrading for the person viewing.

Obviously they are not getting what they feel they need from a real person.

I don't say this as a smart **** but this is how I genuinely feel and I hope they are able to find a real life relationship that meets their needs.


----------



## Edwood (16 October 2011)

lol would've thought a thread about pornography would have more views than 1650!  aren't there any pictures or summat?


----------



## young-gun (16 October 2011)

pavilion103 said:


> I feel sorry for people who look at pr0n tbh. It's kinda degrading for the person viewing.
> 
> Obviously they are not getting what they feel they need from a real person.
> 
> I don't say this as a smart **** but this is how I genuinely feel and I hope they are able to find a real life relationship that meets their needs.




But hang on what about couples that watch pr0n together? I have no doubt that pr0n(not the extreme 5 people gang bangs with a midget a donkey and 4 champagne bottles pr0n) could help to stimulate sex between two that may have lost the spark? perhaps it gives them new ideas? new positions to explore? even cheeky(but not sleazy) harmless locations? friends of ours do it and we're all quite young, now they obviously haven't lost the spark but obviously they enjoy it and it's doing something for them.

The pr0n industry is a multi-billion dollar industry. I can almost say with certainty everyone on this thread has watched some type of pr0n. Do you consider yourself debased? Absolutely not. Granted there is some fairly intense, extreme pr0n out there these days. i work in construction and some of the things that have been passed in front of me make me sick to my stomach, and leave me asking WHY?But they wouldn't produce it if there wasn't a market for it, and if that's what some strange lonely fella wants then let him go. Fact is i think that majority of people would only watch mainstream pr0n which IMO is fairly harmless. It's an everyday act carried out by everyday people. 

We all know why males enter the pr0n industry. And it's probably inevitable for some women to end up in pr0n(natural talent, born to do it?or just love it) regardless of up bringing. But i honestly believe if there wasn't so many broken daddy daughter relationships, or torn apart families for whatever reason, that there would be far less women that think its a good idea to "take a 12 inch monster" for 200$ and a line of coke.

Kudos to those that go through traumatic childhoods and have truly made something of themselves. Unfortunately (and i'm not being smart, rude or disrespectful) not everyone has the mindset or the capability to get through these things and wind up in the wrong places with the wrong people.

In summary, pr0n is controversial but OK IMO.

PS i bet that alot of well known female adult film stars are earning enough that they don't have to worry about when the next best time to invest in the market is


----------



## prawn_86 (16 October 2011)

Top post Young-gun, I totally agree.

As i have said before, the vast majority of pr0n watched online is amatuer pr0n. IE - couples watching other couples, or people watching other people, not the manufactured 'pornstar' type.


----------



## tech/a (16 October 2011)

I gotta say *SHE* gets me all fired up!!


----------



## basilio (30 October 2011)

Saw this excellent presentation by a woman who, from experience,  sees many young men affected by watching too much pr0n.  

She has decided to set up a website called "Make love not pr0n" and invite comments on how pr0n affects peoples lives.  Excellent stuff and worth a visit

http://makelovenotporn.com/about
http://blog.ted.com/2009/12/02/cindy_gallop_ma/


----------



## awg (8 November 2011)

Found a wholesome use for pr0n,

One of my sons is an avid gamer, but less avid at household duties.

Periodically, he emerges from his cave to screech at various family members in turn 
"are you downloading ?" 

The reason is that multiple downloading large files cause his game to "lag" , presumably not a good scenario in multi-player real-time battle games

So I have devised a plan that seems to be working so far

here is the script:

son..Are you downloading?
me..yes
son..can you stop.
me..no  
son..what is it?
me..pr0n 
son...shocked spluttering, expletives, cussing
me..maybe i can if u do that work I've asked you to do 3 times already!

note..you dont have to download actual pr0n, can be any decent size file, just the shock tactics of saying "pr0n", he seems to know this is checkmate, although eventually extra lines of dialogue may need to be added.

Pretend you are a politician, stick to the theme... that is pr0n, how you want too see it now,  have found a hot new series..etc etc...do not allow yourself to be distracted by hysterical arguments...maintain your immorality: 

Most teenagers are very good at arguing against their parents, but I suspect that not many could match these tactics. I dont know whether he thinks I am downloading pr0n or not, they just dont seem to want to have a lengthy debate on the matter


----------



## JTLP (16 November 2011)

Didn't know where to put this so here might be apt.

Lynx - a brand who I'm sure got nearly every teenager through highschool/was in their fragrance regime - has come under fire recently for a rather racy youtube video of women teaching the rules of rugby.

Personally I can see the tongue in cheek play thing that Lynx is - but the Advertising board slammed it down. What do others think about brands like Lynx using women in suggestive ways as a marketing tool? After all - sex sells!


----------



## trainspotter (17 November 2011)

tech/a said:


> I gotta say *SHE* gets me all fired up!!
> 
> 
> View attachment 44902




I gotta say there *IS* something wrong with you !


----------

