• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Pornography poll

Should pornography be bannes? If so, is it because or partially because it exploits women?


  • Total voters
    128

Wherenextcolumbus

Well-Known Member
Yeah I don't like Max Hardcore either. He is controversial and hated even within the porn industry. His brand of porn is illegal in the United States, which actually says a lot considering how difficult it is to get something deemed obscene.

Yeah but how hated is he really when you have companies like ghetto gaggers copying his *****
 

Alceste

Vagabond
So if I go out in the town and offer a woman 1000 dollars to have sex with me, forgetting prostitution laws that is, and she wouldn't have had sex with me if not for the money, you are saying that woman just got raped?

If you are threatening and intimidating her it is. Like, for example, the actress someone brought up earlier who agreed to do normal boy on girl and was told on set that if she didn't do anal she wouldn't be paid for any of it.

I actually don't believe you're having as much trouble grasping the concept of consent as you're pretending to. I think you are arguing for the sake of arguing - at least I hope that's the case.

But just in case you're serious, for your own good and the good of the people you will meet in your life, when you threaten someone with serious economic harm (like a lawsuit) unless they have sex with you, you're committing a sexual assault. Having a contract in your hand authorizing you to do whatever you want to the woman will not save you from successful prosecution. Contracts that violate our basic human rights are inherently void.
 

Pagan_Patriot

Active Member
I believe porn is bad, but I also believe in liberty, so if someone wants to watch it in the privacy of their home, go ahead! Though be sure to clean up afterwards....
 

Me Myself

Back to my username
If you are threatening and intimidating her it is. Like, for example, the actress someone brought up earlier who agreed to do normal boy on girl and was told on set that if she didn't do anal she wouldn't be paid for any of it.

I actually don't believe you're having as much trouble grasping the concept of consent as you're pretending to. I think you are arguing for the sake of arguing - at least I hope that's the case.

But just in case you're serious, for your own good and the good of the people you will meet in your life, when you threaten someone with serious economic harm (like a lawsuit) unless they have sex with you, you're committing a sexual assault. Having a contract in your hand authorizing you to do whatever you want to the woman will not save you from successful prosecution. Contracts that violate our basic human rights are inherently void.

I think I missed the part of the threaten and intimidation.

It seemed like he gave an oportunity to earn money.
 

Me Myself

Back to my username
It's not consent if there is coercion (i.e. Threats and intimidation).

Do your jor I wont pay you its what any worker from any service will get.

If the person wont pay the employee even though the employee is making the job as agreed, then there is a problem, like in any job.
 

Orias

Left Hand Path
Shouldn't be banned. Honestly, it does exploit women in some way. It uses women and sex as a commodity to be traded and sold, but this in my opinion is not negative whatsoever. Just a way to exploit the nature of man to make a profit. If the act(s) is/are partaken by consensual adults I have zero problems with it.

Pornography doesn't just exploit women, like you said, it exploits the nature of man (including men and women).

This should simply be the end of this thread, like all things we perceive, it is an exploit in attempt to understand the true nature of man kind. Morales and configurations have little to do with the actualities of the pre-programmed man.
 

roger1440

I do stuff
evidence said:
Originally Posted by more evidence
To believe prostitution has no victims, one must ignore these statistics published in Farley's Fact Sheet:
78 percent of 55 women who sought help from the Council for Prostitution Alternatives in 1991 reported being raped an average of 16 times a year by pimps, and were raped 33 times a year by johns.
62 percent reported having been raped in prostitution.
73 percent reported having experienced physical assault in prostitution.
72 percent were currently or formerly homeless.
92 percent stated that they wanted to escape prostitution immediately.
83 percent of prostitutes are victims of assault with a weapon.
75 percent of women in escort prostitution had attempted suicide.
67 percent meet diagnostic criteria for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
Prevalence of Incest
In short, the victims of prostitution are mostly the prostitutes themselves. It just may be that they no longer have the ability left to "consent" to be a willing participant in their so-called victimless crime. Estimates of the prevalence of incest among prostitutes range from 65 percent to 90 percent. The Council for Prostitution Alternatives, Portland, Oregon Annual Report in 1991 found that: 85 percent of their prostitute clients reported history of sexual abuse in childhood while 70 percent reported incest.
The statistics you had quoted are from women seeking help with prostitution. The women obviously have a problem with prostitution walking in the door. These statistics do not represent the average prostitute. Therefore they are misleading. Let’s say 98% of people going to a diabetic clinic have a problem with their blood sugar. It would be absurd to come to the conclusion that 98% of people have a problem with their blood sugar.
 

NoraSariah

Active Member
No, it shouldn't be banned, because hey, naked people. Fun. Awesome. But I do believe it exploits women. Mainstream porn gives us an unrealistic idea that women should be hairless, skinny, and that we should have huge boobs and butts. But not all porn is like that.
 

Me Myself

Back to my username
No, it shouldn't be banned, because hey, naked people. Fun. Awesome. But I do believe it exploits women. Mainstream porn gives us an unrealistic idea that women should be hairless, skinny, and that we should have huge boobs and butts. But not all porn is like that.

exploit
Translate exploit | into French | into German | into Italian | into Spanish
verb
Pronunciation: /ɪkˈsplɔɪt, ɛk-/
[with object]
1make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource):
500 companies sprang up to exploit this new technology
2make use of (a situation) in a way considered unfair or underhand:
the company was exploiting a legal loophole
benefit unfairly from the work of (someone), typically by overworking or underpaying them:
women are exploited in the workplace


ehm, so which definition of exploit are you refering to? If you mean benefit from women as resource, then sure it does (human resources, almost any or all business do)

Exploiting a situation in a way considered unfair? I dont see anything unfair on providing a product people desire.

Porn doesnt exploit women any more than it exploits men. There is at least some argument it exploits men, although I wouldnt say that, given they being payed less than women.

Of course a lot of wage gap sexism apologetics wouldnt touch that :D
 

roger1440

I do stuff
No, it shouldn't be banned, because hey, naked people. Fun. Awesome. But I do believe it exploits women. Mainstream porn gives us an unrealistic idea that women should be hairless, skinny, and that we should have huge boobs and butts. But not all porn is like that.

Porn is not meant to be realistic. It is meant to entertain and arose the viewer. Many men like “women should be hairless, skinny, and that we should have huge boobs and butts”. Superman and Spiderman aren’t realistic either.

Porn wouldn’t work very well if it depicted women who were beat down with an ugly stick.
 
Last edited:

Riverwolf

Amateur Rambler / Proud Ergi
Premium Member
I can't vote on any of the issues, because my vote isn't represented.

I don't believe it should be banned, but I also believe that whether porn exploits women or not is really a case-by-case basis. There's plenty of porn that absolutely exploits women, but there's also plenty of porn that doesn't.

Or, heck, what about gay porn?

Hentai? Comics? Books?

The poll doesn't provide enough options.
 

MrOmega

Member
Nah... why divide generations yet again? Maybe too much advancement too fast is unwise, and waiting on true disasters is best.
 

MrOmega

Member
I voted the last one, although, yeah logically porno does and does not exploit both men, women and sometimes children.

So... porno... good... lack of humanities involvement sweeping things under the rug, inhumane and bad...

The true issue is how people plan on providing protection measures if any, as a choice with parents raising children.
 

ryobi

Member
I believe people can be willing to do the work and still exploited. The rugs I saw in Morocco, for example, were mostly created by child labour. The kids often lose their eyesight because of this work and are paid next to nothing. African kids in gold mines extract gold flakes by rubbing mercury between their bare hands. No doubt some of these kids - if not most - are happy to have the work. Just as Chinese factory workers are often happy to have the work, even when they're chained to their sewing machines.

Consenting to your own exploitation doesn't negate the fact that an industry is generally exploitative.

Are football players exploited?
 
Top