Author Topic: Porn as a public health hazard  (Read 383 times)

Offline aitm

Re: Porn as a public health hazard
« Reply #15 on: April 23, 2021, 11:55:32 AM »
My simple solution to end porn, eliminate the need for it and the desire for it, the money and all the trappings that go with it. Make clothes disappear. Give the population about 6 months of seeing naked everywhere and pretty soon no one gets excited by a string bikini with bulging titties poking yer eye out, cause you can see everyones. And of course, as much as men might say, "hell yeah, lets do that!" we remind them, "well, you have to be naked too. "uh...wat?". No man wants to walk down the street next to a guy dragging a log between his legs. They would all tattoos themselves, "Grower, not a show-er!"   LOLOL
A humans desire to live is exceeded only by their willingness to die for another. Even god cannot equal this magnificent sacrifice. No god has the right to judge them.-first tenant of the Panotheust

Online Hydra009

Re: Porn as a public health hazard
« Reply #16 on: April 23, 2021, 12:02:57 PM »
No man wants to walk down the street next to a guy dragging a log between his legs.
Don't threaten me with a good time.

Re: Porn as a public health hazard
« Reply #17 on: April 23, 2021, 03:58:54 PM »
I do legitimately believe that pornography and the consumption of it is nearly as high up as greed in terms of moral failures of modern society; so much of modern art is heavily influenced by it to a certain extent at the cost of meaningful expression, because it appeals to a base instinct that the wealthy can exploit rather than a true selfless expression of the soul...



If you don't brainwash people from childhood about sex in some scale; that it is bad, dirty, dangerous, that it is a sin...that only in certain circumstances they should have sex -which is related to with whom they should have sex- if you do not load some social, religious, soco-economic, class meaning and etiquette on to it, give them sexual education from a very young age and let them free with their peers, most of the people would all fuck each other randomly all their lives. At some point, they would stop thinking of in leagues of physcial traits or finance when hooking up. Traditional marriage would perish. Thats a huge shift in social life.

What happens then? The family unit would be something very different. Traditional norms would collapse. It also means the collapse of many industries, lol. The capital would get affected badly, get scattered. The class system would be affected, lol.

Sexual revolutions are dangerous, they are the doors to all kind of other revolutions...lol

« Last Edit: April 23, 2021, 04:03:11 PM by GSOgymrat »
"Religions are like fireflies. They require darkness in order to shine." - Arthur Schopenhauer

Online Shiranu

Re: Porn as a public health hazard
« Reply #18 on: April 23, 2021, 04:11:37 PM »
A naked body is not inherently pornographic; almost all of those statues are related to mythological stories and figures, whereas pornography by definition is solely focused on invoking sexual arousal. Likewise it takes an infinite amount more talent to create, carve from a formless block of soft stone, the subtle form of flesh, of movement and life, than to put sexy lady on cover to sell more (insert product here) to men or have DEM ABS on an actor to draw in female views.

I know that sounds like i'm implying that's how you feel about it, but it's not; I just have met people who legitimately think those statues are too indecent and should be removed from public view because they are just nasty base things, and that brings back bad emotions.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2021, 04:28:41 PM by Shiranu »

Online Shiranu

Re: Porn as a public health hazard
« Reply #19 on: April 23, 2021, 04:24:12 PM »
Quote
I think the rise of OnlyFans has created concern for traditional porn studios and people who oppose pornography. It gives individuals complete control of the content they create and can be a lucrative home business. It doesn't address the concern some people have about sex as a product in a capitalistic system or the objectification of people.

Yeah, I'm really not sure the role porn studios serve in today's world; there will always be a place for them I'm sure, but more and more it seems like people prefer models they can interact with (and thus spend far more money on them).

My guess is these studios will shift more towards providing stages, costumes, props, co-stars for these actresses/actors and take a cut of the profits rather than the traditional salaried system they used... and more than likely will be in close relationship with the big sites to make sure that their models are promoted ahead of actual indie models.

Quote
I do think when people discuss pornography they sometimes forget money isn't involved in a lot of porn. The "boudoir photo" exchanged among romantic partners has a long history. Gay men exchange nudes or partial nudes online as a matter course. Let me add that guys with all body types do this, not just the ones with chiseled bodies.

That's true, I never really consider that pornography even though by definition it is.

Re: Porn as a public health hazard
« Reply #20 on: April 23, 2021, 05:39:48 PM »
That's true, I never really consider that pornography even though by definition it is.

Exchange of explicit photos between minors, and sometimes unfortunately minors and adults, is very common and can have severe social and legal consequences, as it is often considered creation and distribution of child pornography.
"Religions are like fireflies. They require darkness in order to shine." - Arthur Schopenhauer

Online Hydra009

Re: Porn as a public health hazard
« Reply #21 on: April 23, 2021, 06:05:13 PM »
A naked body is not inherently pornographic; almost all of those statues are related to mythological stories and figures, whereas pornography by definition is solely focused on invoking sexual arousal.
I dunno if that's necessarily true.  I've seen stuff that could certainly be framed if it was less explicit.  And as I alluded to earlier, there's some humor to be found as well.

I've never seen anyone very well define exactly what porn is, and I doubt I will here, because it seems to have a fuzzy boundary.

Quote
I know that sounds like i'm implying that's how you feel about it, but it's not; I just have met people who legitimately think those statues are too indecent and should be removed from public view because they are just nasty base things, and that brings back bad emotions.
Quite so.  There's a certain amount of subjectivity - some of the more prudish among us may put their hands in front of their kids eyes when walking by some of those nude statues, while others might take a hammer to them in defense of modesty if the opportunity presented itself.

Imo, the reason nude statues provoke less of a reaction than other nudes may be due to context and upbringing - these statues are understood primarily as works of art - surrounded by other art - belonging with other art.  And so it's viewed with less eroticism than it otherwise might.  If I were to sneak a genuinely pornographic nude into the louvre (something appropriately tasteful and requiring genuine talent), that might be enough for it to blend in and be viewed as just another work of art.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2021, 06:11:36 PM by Hydra009 »

Online Shiranu

Re: Porn as a public health hazard
« Reply #22 on: April 23, 2021, 06:42:09 PM »
Quote
I dunno if that's necessarily true.  I've seen stuff that could certainly be framed if it was less explicit.

I think it could be argued then that it's not pornography, as the creator (assumingly) intended it to be not just sexually arousing but visually appeasing as well... something meant to be appreciated (bluntly) regardless of if it gives you a boner or not.

Of course it then leads to the age old question; what is art, and who gets to decide what is or isn't?

Quote
I've never seen anyone very well define exactly what porn is, and I doubt I will here, because it seems to have a fuzzy boundary.

I look at it through the lens that it is any product solely intended to arouse people, and in my personal opinion it should really only apply to things presented as a product (rather than the example of two individuals sending nudes to one another). If that counts, then whenever a girl dances in lingerie for her partner, is that pornography? What about a man walking around with his shirt off and muscles bulging to attract women?

It's unfortunate that we don't have a true working definition, because it's impossible to solve a problem before you can even define it... but I doubt society will ever really want to sit down and collectively decide what we want pornography to mean. 

Online Hydra009

Re: Porn as a public health hazard
« Reply #23 on: April 23, 2021, 06:49:10 PM »
I think it could be argued then that it's not pornography, as the creator (assumingly) intended it to be not just sexually arousing but visually appeasing as well... something meant to be appreciated (bluntly) regardless of if it gives you a boner or not.
It doesn't cease to be porn, it's a combination of porn and something else.

Quote
Of course it then leads to the age old question; what is art, and who gets to decide what is or isn't?
That's a very good question to which I have no real answer.  I could guess and say that it's something that the community finds aesthetically pleasing, but that doesn't seem quite right.

Quote
I look at it through the lens that it is any product solely intended to arouse people, and in my personal opinion it should really only apply to things presented as a product (rather than the example of two individuals sending nudes to one another). If that counts, then whenever a girl dances in lingerie for her partner, is that pornography? What about a man walking around with his shirt off and muscles bulging to attract women?
Good questions.  Yet another way in which the definition of porn as provoking arousal isn't quite right - there's arousing stuff that isn't normally considered pornographic.

Quote
It's unfortunate that we don't have a true working definition, because it's impossible to solve a problem before you can even define it... but I doubt society will ever really want to sit down and collectively decide what we want pornography to mean.
True enough.

Re: Porn as a public health hazard
« Reply #24 on: April 23, 2021, 07:23:53 PM »
Pornography is another one of those words like art or beauty.  It is hard to define, but you know it when you see it--or so they say.  I don't know how many times my wife or a friend would say something like--that's a beautiful woman.  Often I reply that no, she is not beautiful, but she is attractive (or even plain).  Beauty is simply a matter of taste.  My idea of beauty is not always what others think of it as.  So too, with pornography or art; it is a matter of taste.  I absolutely hate Picasso and I do not consider him to be a good artist.  I also don't consider man/woman sex acts as porn.  Mix in violence, and then it becomes porn.  Porn has a negative connotation and so anything labeled as porn is not good.  As far as I'm concerned the entire Rep. party is porn--the violent type.  I don't think porn will ever be universally defined; it changes with almost every individual.   
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?

Re: Porn as a public health hazard
« Reply #25 on: April 23, 2021, 09:03:05 PM »
pornography by definition is solely focused on invoking sexual arousal.

If someone makes a porn video and no one is aroused does it cease to be pornography? #pornfails 😁

"Religions are like fireflies. They require darkness in order to shine." - Arthur Schopenhauer

Online Shiranu

Re: Porn as a public health hazard
« Reply #26 on: April 23, 2021, 09:24:38 PM »
If someone makes a porn video and no one is aroused does it cease to be pornography? #pornfails 😁



Intention vs result; it would still be pornographic even if humanity ceased to exist, just like a car is still a car even if no one is around to have driven it.

Quote from: Hydra009
It doesn't cease to be porn, it's a combination of porn and something else.

I couldn't think how to answer Hydra on this earlier, but the earlier quote kick-started my mind back up...

It would logically cease to be porn; pornography only refers to, in the definitions I've seen, things that solely are produced to get a sexual response; so if it is also produced with the intention of being found aesthetically pleasing it would no longer be pornography as it has more than one certain goal.

I would guess the new category it would fall under is sensual or erotic, which then opens up a whole nother' can of worms on what those mean.

Re: Porn as a public health hazard
« Reply #27 on: April 23, 2021, 09:46:53 PM »
Intention vs result; it would still be pornographic even if humanity ceased to exist, just like a car is still a car even if no one is around to have driven it.

I agree, I was just kidding.

Pornography, art, taboos... it's all very subjective and subject to the whims of culture. I'm solidly opposed to censorship but adult material (erotica, explicit violence, substance use, etc.) needs to be contained in adult spaces. There can then be conversations on the risks and benefits of pornography, the intersection of erotic material and art, the moral implications of sexual expression, and such. I'm particularly interested in how people tend to have an instinctual feeling that certain things, like pornography, are base/carnal/degenerative and certain things are elevated/virtuous/pure. It's part of the psychology of disgust and underlies the widespread idea that the body is a temple that can be desecrated by immoral activities and contaminants (an idea not unique to religious traditions).
"Religions are like fireflies. They require darkness in order to shine." - Arthur Schopenhauer

Offline drunkenshoe

Re: Porn as a public health hazard
« Reply #28 on: April 24, 2021, 05:48:09 AM »
If something captures your attention and engages you, provide you an emotional discharge; put you in catharsis, push-move you in some way, I think it's safe to say that it is art. Thanks to Wittgenstein, art is defined as 'cannot be defined' because that would require to define the circumstances, conditions of creating an 'art work' which has countless variations that constantly change and art itself has fundamentally changed over and over again. It looks and 'accepted' like an impossibility. (I think there was a return to it to push the topic recently -20 years so, period?- but I have no idea of it... I haven't followed anything in the last decade.)

Consider the traditonal art generally. If you are interested in it, you spend time with it. You look at more and more pieces, you collect experiences of many art works. That creates a repository in your mind, and a third eye if you will. As art historians say, you become a 'citizen of the art world' in time. The interesting part is that at some point, what you enjoy as art, what you find 'beautiful', 'meaningful' as art; your understanding of aesthetics changes; it 'matures'.

Concerning pornography, I've seen adult men talking about the evolution of their porn taste and tendencies according to age periods in their lives. The common idea -the generalisation- was that while in adolescence they were interested in hentai -or plastic, augmented, unnatural female features and exaggerated actions-  at some point at some age, they 'graduated' to the realistic female figures and what's called amauteur porn, because the work over all, obviously gives a more genuine feeling.

This really kind of reminds me the deal with the evolution of art experience I tried to describe above crudely. I personally even think that one of the reasons 'amateur' porn has become the main genre because we finally have passed the 'renaissance' or 'baroque' with exaggerated forms in sexual action  and reach the individualistic, realistic period.

Yes, it is very different. Yes there is the intention to arouse and provide physical realese, but then why do we choose between very similar scenes if that's the only thing with porn? Why just the face expression affects our preferences? Or choose that one to watch first? Why does something we found very arousing at some time lose all its allure later while the content stays the same?

On the other hand, what kind of arousal and (emotional) discharge we get when we find something -nonsexual- that engages our attention that we really enjoy? People game hours and hours on end. People watch tv series and movies hours and hours on end. Isn't that 'pornographic' in terms of consumption?

Could it it be that 'porn' is actually -or has become- some sort of a quality that is independent from the product itself, more related to the ways of its consumption, but seen-defined differently because the content is a real physical display of the main taboo(s)? (And well, needlessly to say that the industry has serious, life altering consequences for people in it and so other real life concerns.)

So I think we arrive to the evolution of the general culture (of consumption) again as a problem, more than the qualities of the product itself.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2021, 06:00:39 AM by drunkenshoe »
"I believe you find life such a problem because you think there are good people and bad people. You're wrong, of course. There are, always and only, the bad people, but some of them are on opposite sides." Havelock Vetinari

Offline Draconic Aiur

Re: Porn as a public health hazard
« Reply #29 on: April 24, 2021, 07:05:58 AM »
I say porn isn't a vice or a sin it's basic necessity of life. Like any basic necessity it should be looked at moderately because too much leads to mental or physical disorders. I say basic necessity because not all of us have partners and or need help with arousal or just need a hit if you know what I'm saying.

The porn industry, I think needs fixing because it is often tied with corruption, sex trafficking, and sex offenders. Those people known for this activity are part of the problem and the other percentage should go to rich and wealthy profiteers and public norms and perception of gender and class and or ethnicity.  Politics also plays a part in this  and just like he who must not be named said "if your a celebrity...you can grab 'em by the pussy" and not get caught. This quote was brushed of by his followers because it is assumed in the public that its okay to make a dirty "joke" because if you have the money, power or fame you can get away with anything. This corruption along with ethnical, gender, and class oppressions leads  into the cycle of identity theft that is spread in numerous topic like abortion for example. These corrupted people are accepted by the public and because people accept it it draws in like minded  corrupt individuals who see all of this as encouragement.