Why is pornography bad?

[nnmartin]

Assuming that those who participate in porn do so willingly, why should porn be demonized or at least condemned?

If you claim that it provokes lust please explain why lust is necessarily bad, AND THEN be prepared to back up your contention that porn actually provokes lust with facts.

I wouldn't say that porn is especially bad but it does provoke lust for sure. No facts at this moment but it's fairly obvious that if you look at pictures of naked women it is likely that you are going to want some of the real thing more.

Human nature I believe.

Obsessive, uncontrolled lust should be avoided.

 

[not nom]

Assuming that those who participate in porn do so willingly

huge assumption right there.

 

[nnmartin]

I figure most do it for the money which is the same as being willing.

 

[not nom]

I figure most do it for the money which is the same as being willing.

the will to not starve?

 

[nnmartin]

yes, the same as the will not to starve by working in MacDonalds or low wage factory type job

 

[not nom]

and in those case it would also be very rich to speak of voluntary work. when people do something because it's better than something else, that's not voluntary. I mean, by that logic giving an armed robber your wallet would be voluntarily deciding to not get shot. and that's just silly.

I'm not denying there are penty of people who love to screw and enjoy being filmed when doing it. I'd never trot out the other cases to attack porn in general and fundamentally, because that's cheap. if a few people can have a great time making porn and have none of the ill effects, that proves porn doesn't have to be degrading, right?

but as it actually is today, as a whole, I think porn is a sad, messed up industry, and the people it doesn't **** up are those who are ****** up to begin with -- and that wasn't a choice either.

 

[not nom]

also, the word derives from "illustration of prostitution", not "illustration of lust". it's always been married to power structures and abuse -- if you think otherwise I'd love to know a.) what kind of porn you've been exposed to, and b.) what planet you live on.

 

[nnmartin]

ok , but assuming one is not forced into working in porn films then it is a choice.

Even if you have no money you don't have to work in this industry - plenty of poor people around the world get by without doing this.

I'm not entirely clear on what your point is.

care to explain more?

 

[cablescavenger]

Assuming that those who participate in porn do so willingly, why should porn be demonized or at least condemned?

If you claim that it provokes lust please explain why lust is necessarily bad, AND THEN be prepared to back up your contention that porn actually provokes lust with facts.

Youngsters will learn from it, but it is misleading.

In the words of John Bishop, they are not usually that enthusiastic.

 

[not nom]

Even if you have no money you don't have to work in this industry - plenty of poor people around the world get by without doing this.

do they?

my point is that behind a lot of choices, force and restraints (and in not few cases past abuse) conspire to make them much less of a choice. and I don't think that should EVER be glossed over. porn, at best, is a luxury, but at worst it's akin to murder.

 

[nnmartin]

how can you liken porn to murder??

 

[not nom]

you still haven't answered what kind of porn you've been exposed to and what planet you live on. I said "at worst". read that as "porn at its worst". if you don't understand what I mean by that I don't want to be the one who has to explain it to you :/

 

[not nom]

okay, less polemic: it's luxury at best, abuse at worst. that's no exaggeration and shouldn't really be controversial? my point with that was, I'm not sure how much that luxury is worth to me, compared to how much suffering it can also entail. you might argue one can be had without the other - "good porn" by consenting adults, without any abuse or trickery - but the way I see it, each "happy pornstar" is covering for 100 sex slaves, wether they want to or not.

 

[Skwim]

okay, less polemic: it's luxury at best, abuse at worst. that's no exaggeration and shouldn't really be controversial? my point with that was, I'm not sure how much that luxury is worth to me, compared to how much suffering it can also entail. you might argue one can be had without the other - "good porn" by consenting adults, without any abuse or trickery - but the way I see it, each "happy pornstar" is covering for 100 sex slaves, wether they want to or not.

So, what should we concluded from this, that you agree "'good porn' by consenting adults, without any abuse or trickery"---essentially the prime qualifier in my OP---is acceptable?

 

[nnmartin]

but the way I see it, each "happy pornstar" is covering for 100 sex slaves, wether they want to or not.

but the same could be said in nearly any industry

for example:

Factory workers in the USA under good conditions are covering for sweat shops in the Third World.

as for your question: I was refering to normal consensual porn between adult men and women.

not sure what planet I'm on though!:areyoucra

 

[Watchmen]

I heard Dr. Drew say once that porn creates false expectations of sex. I've also heard that it can be "bad" because it removes emotion from the sexual equation.

 

[nnmartin]

there's nothing bad about removing emotion though.

Sex is really just a bodily function that sometimes feels better with love - only sometimes though.

 

[Skwim]

I heard Dr. Drew say once that porn creates false expectations of sex. I've also heard that it can be "bad" because it removes emotion from the sexual equation.

What's a Dr. Drew, and why should I care what he says?

 

[nnmartin]

isn't he an Oprah Winfrey type character, something like that anyway I think....

 

[not nom]

as for your question: I was refering to normal consensual porn between adult men and women.

well, I'm sorry. when I'm asked what I think about porn, I don't consider mainly fringe cases. does porn have to be bad? I guess not. is it? often enough, yes.

So, what should we concluded from this, that you agree "'good porn' by consenting adults, without any abuse or trickery"---essentially the prime qualifier in my OP---is acceptable?

see above. who cares about that? when people say "porn", they usually mean the bulk of actually existing porn, you know?

the "illustration of prostitution" by definition does not include people having fun and filming it. ever thought about that?