Pornography

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.

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.

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.

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.

I like pr0n and use it often.

pr0n's contribution to the tech industry.

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

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?

Click to expand...

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.

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.

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.

tech/a said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

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.

Click to expand...

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

noco said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

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.

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.

Click to expand...

I was just about to type this word for word.

We do not need to be protected from ourselves.

cheers
Surly

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.

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

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 ?]

Click to expand...

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

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.

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

wayneL said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.