Posts by BenWilson
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
"" I'm not saying it's a good idea. Neither is the end of the world, or the holocaust, but I'll watch both in a movie."
Neither of those examples are ever offered up so explicitly for a viewer's pleasure. You don't get the wokkita-wokkita soundtrack or the everyone's-having-a-good-or-at-least-interesting-time subtext in any Holocaust film I've ever seen. Sympathetic frisson, perhaps, but not pleasure."
Clearly they are not exactly the same thing. I'm just saying that something that's a bad idea can make good viewing. To say a film like Schindler's List is not explicit is being obtuse. I found it full of full-on disgusting ideas portrayed in full technicolor glory. Far more disturbing than any porno I've ever seen.
And as for end of world films, many of them are upbeat. But no one cries foul that this might be an unrealistic portrayal. It's fantasy - not expected to be real.
-
Fake nails? I'm more bitter on gross looking tats. Now *that's* exploitation.
-
"If porn does any moral harm, it's more through (primarily male) consumers getting used to the idea that the (primarily female) subjects are a tradable commodity, than to those who get a decent wage performing in the industry."
I'd say the (primarily male) consumers are already well accustomed to that idea. As are many (primarily female) non-consumers. Even in places where there is no porn. It's an old idea. Porn may be *an* expression of it, but there are plenty of others.
I'm not saying it's a good idea. Neither is the end of the world, or the holocaust, but I'll watch both in a movie.
(actually I lie, I have never completely watched a holocaust movie. Too much of a bumout. But an end of the world movie, man, eat it up)
-
"I don't know if it's a gripe, so much as the element of consent being so dubious."
Yeah, it's a softer form of rape fetish. Not really my bag, but again, we come to this: Would anyone who didn't already think there was something hot about taking advantage of drunk girls think Girls Gone Wild was hot? And furthermore, is there not a huge difference between thinking something is hot and doing it?
I don't really see any difference between this and movies depicting any other kind of illegal activity. How is it OK to depict graphic murder, or reckless driving, or acts of terrorism or, well, basically any fictional scenario involving lawbreaking? Doesn't that 'give people ideas'? Or glorify the lawbreaking?
No. Fiction and other fantasy is just that. Porn is simply a version that people find it hard to discuss honestly, because it suggests they jerk off, and that's considered shameful. Which is ironic since it's something most men do, and a lot of women, and there's nothing wrong with it.
The only arguments against porn that I consider of any worth are those around the harm done to people in the production, as someone so pointedly said above. If people genuinely suffered non-consensually, then I think that's wrong and that should be stopped.
But I don't think most porn is like that. It's actors with no talent or training getting paid well to do a job that's probably a bit painful at times, but not in the same league as being a stuntman on a Jackie Chan film. They formally consent, do their shoot, and then go about their lives much like the rest of us. To suggest that they can't really formally consent to something like porn is to take away a fairly fundamental right with all the arrogance of an interfering clergy getting bitter on pre-marital sex.
-
"I'm really uncomfortable with what seems like a growth in the "girls gone wild" type porn, when there's a pack mentality and also lots of booze involved. That seems pretty borderline consentual when the girls are often about to pass out."
LOL everyone's got their own special gripe. Mine is that 'straight' porn these days has far too much anal sex and multiple blokes. And guess what? I still haven't converted to anal sex and MMF. It doesn't matter how many times they try to slip it in there, I'm not converting. It does nothing for me. Which is why I don't really think arguments against porn centering around the effect on the watcher hold water.
Can anyone reading honestly say that they've decided to do something they would never have wanted before, just because they saw it in a porn movie? LOL, of course not because no one would dare to admit they watched more than one porn movie and felt anything other than outrage about it. Personally, the only thing I ever got from porn that 'warped' me, was an idea for a few positions that had never occurred to me.
-
Russell
Until young men have sex they won't know what it is like. This is true whether or not they see porn. How is having no idea better than having a fantasy idea? They are the same, in fact. All your criticism leads to is an argument for better education. No problem with that idea.
Yup, I watch music videos. And even when I was 5 I could see they bore little resemblance to reality. I don't think children are particularly unable to recognize fantasy when they see it. If you have a gripe, it is that those kids might like that fantasy, and also act on it (2 quite different events). And I have to ask you, if they do like it, when do you think that happened? When they watched the video? Or were they already inclined to think hos shaking their booties were mighty fine?
-
Lamenting the moral decline of modern society is as old as society itself. Porn's a good target for moralizing because most people probably won't talk truthfully about what they really think of it, or what they like, or how much they have, or how often they use it.
For good reason - mostly it's no one else's business. So the arguments are one sided. Who really wants to talk to the world about their porn? Indeed most people would not like to talk authoritatively about the subject at all, unless it was to condemn it, for fear people might think they were more into porn than average - the average that no-one knows anyway. Which is kind of funny because I reckon most men are *experts* on this particular subject.
So it's really hard to have rational discussions about it. And it's really easy to get on a bandwagon hammering it, because you can easily mistake the deafening silence for agreement.
Personally, I don't think porn has very much effect at all, other than perhaps leading to a decline of imagination. I don't think it alters anyone's way of looking at the world. If they get hot to a particular idea, then they will enjoy seeing it. And ideas that do nothing for them will be avoided. The preferences were there *already*. Sure some particular ideas may never have occurred to someone until they saw it, but if they got hot to it, then that was a pre-existing state of their mind, not something forced in there by the devious pornographer.
If someone likes the idea of rape, then when they see it, they might get horny. If they dislike it, then when they see it they will be turned off. If they don't care about it either way then most likely it will just seem like an annoying distraction. So rape-fetish porn only appeals to people who already had a rape-fetish. You could argue that to see it strengthens the fetish and makes you more likely to act on it. I can't think why. If you can't see it, but it's a fetish for you, then you'll just imagine it. How is that less powerful? To conjure images up in your own mind in graphic detail, to invent scenarios of rape in your mind, is every bit as motivating as seeing something. It might differ in *form* from the depictions, but the *content* is the same.
And there's still the huge jump from idea to action. Liking the idea of rape is very different from being a rapist. I personally like martial arts and war films, but that doesn't make me want to take on a whole gang unarmed, or join the army. Almost nothing that we like to watch on TV or DVD would we actually do ourselves, and porn is no exception to that. How many people do you know who have shot someone? Or done a forensic examination on a cadaver? Or stepped through a stargate to an alternate universe? For the same reason I have never had sex with a woman at the same time as some other guy. I could certainly watch that - watching it doesn't involve me flopping my erect chop out in front of some other guy - but I would never do it (even when I had the opportunity).
Because I think porn doesn't really *change* our thinking, I don't think the 'pornification of culture' is because of the increasing abundance of porn. Both phenomena are simply driven by societal demand. We can argue about the reasons for *that*, but blaming people liking porn on the existence of more porn is silly. If people didn't like porn there wouldn't be so much of it. If people didn't like girls who look and act like pornstars, then they wouldn't do it. Taking away porn isn't going to stop men liking scantily clad girls acting like they're going to put out. I liked that way before I ever saw any porn, and I probably always will.
What I'm more interested in is why so many people have a problem with it. The 'pornification of culture' is just our generation's celebration of one particular kind of beauty.
Sure, it's exclusive and most girls can't live up to it. But beauty always was. In every culture at every time, beauty has always been by definition something 'ideal', a representation of what people would like, rather than what they necessarily had.
Sure it's 'demeaning' in that it suggests that a girl's body will get her what she wants. But that is actually true. I think this is really what the lamentation is about - the simple and awful truth represented by the art, that beautiful woman can get what they want if they put out to wealthy/powerful men. It's true now, and it was true before humans could even draw porn (which interestingly is amongst the first things ever drawn by humans, showing exactly how old this art form is).
I don't think it's ever going to change. Like, ever. People will like porn forever. Society will use that like to sell stuff forever. It will always be embarrassing to be caught liking it. It will always be fodder for moralizing by those who don't like it. Girls will always try to look as hot as possible. What is considered hot in a girl will always be what men think is hot (gay is a subculture with it's own tastes but the same dynamic exists). What men think is hot will always centre around sex. Culture will always pornify.
-
Read my first bit of Investigate today in the doctors waiting room, waiting for a double dose of penicillin in my butt. I imagine Wishart would have been bitter about everything about that. Taking drugs intravenously. Letting a man see my butt. Finding that it didn't hurt as much as people say it does. Probably having the state pay for some of it (wouldn't know). Not being at work during.
The article claimed to be exploding myths about Palestine/Israel. All that actually exploded was my patience for reading something with zero citations of any factual nature at all. A glossy rightist blog without comments to keep it sane.
Then again, the Economist was starting to sound just the same, which is scary. It used to be a good read.
-
LOL Peter, that's class. I did think it odd that Iranian weapons would have english markings but the non-gregorian calendar system pickup takes the cake. Unless Iran does a roaring trade selling weapons to english speaking countries I couldn't think of any reason you'd put most of the key details about the weapon in a language most of your soldiers can't speak or read. I guess the fact the measurements are in *metric* would be enough to convince any god-fearing american that the weapons must have been made by someone evil, though.
-
What's a bet their 'financial advisory services' is a front for getting you to buy into their managed fund?
As for Iran, I really can't see military action by the US against them. It breaks the mold of requiring a 30:1 advantage in force. Desperate sabre rattling to distract from the real cockup that is Iraq.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 … 1066 Older→ First