Sinfest Forum Index Sinfest
welcome to the fest
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

2013-08-20 BUT WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY...
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> Sinfest
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
TerseRiddle



Joined: 27 Jun 2013
Posts: 198
Location: In my head

PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 2:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Felgraf wrote:
Monkey Mcdermott wrote:


I love ya Sam but care to bet i can go 3 for 1 on horrible exploitative hate fantasy porn sites vs legitimate positive expression of human sexuality porn sites?


... I'm sure you can, that doesn't exactly negate his statement that porn can and does get created that is positive and not exploitative.

He made no qualitative statement about whether or not it was the majority of porn. He simply said "Hey it is possible for porn to exist that is not exploitative towards women. It is out there".

I'm sure I could go 3 for 1 with you on, say, scientists vs. creationists, but that doesn't mean scientists don't exist.


I think you meant to say that it doesn't mean that creationists don't exist... atleast for the sake of the analogy... I do agree with you though.
_________________
Everyone is equal in the eyes of death.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Felgraf



Joined: 10 Jul 2012
Posts: 645

PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 3:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, depending. Sometimes it feels like we're outumbered here in the states by the creationists (Like, say, the Duggar clan *alone*).

But yes, regardless. The argument "THERE'S WAY MORE X THAN Y" is... not.. really an indication that Y does not exist.
_________________
"No, but evil is still being --Is having reason-- Being reasonable! Mousie understands? Is always being reason. Is punishing world for not being... Like in head. Is always reason. World should be different, is reason."
-Ed, from Digger
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Monkey Mcdermott



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 3152

PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 3:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Felgraf wrote:
Well, depending. Sometimes it feels like we're outumbered here in the states by the creationists (Like, say, the Duggar clan *alone*).

But yes, regardless. The argument "THERE'S WAY MORE X THAN Y" is... not.. really an indication that Y does not exist.


No one has claimed that Y doesn't exist though. People just driveby to go, WELL NOT ALL PORN IS BAD.

so...

Yes, And?

Because much like way more X than Y doesn't negate the existence of Y the argument that Y exists and is not problematic doesn't change the fact that the vast vast majority is X, not Y, and is.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Felgraf



Joined: 10 Jul 2012
Posts: 645

PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 3:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Monkey Mcdermott wrote:
Sam wrote:
locuas wrote:
porn is not a sin because it is not female friendly(or because it has girls on it), but rather because it would be the fall into our carnal desires.


by the same ruleset that declares homosexuality or having sex outside of marriage is a sin, yes, porn is objectively a bad thing. it's all the same assy grab-bag of policing sexuality, though.

meanwhile off in the real world porn can and does get created which is a perfectly legitimate and positive expression of human sexuality


I love ya Sam but care to bet i can go 3 for 1 on horrible exploitative hate fantasy porn sites vs legitimate positive expression of human sexuality porn sites?


Here is where you... sort of imply that porn *can't* be a perfectly legitimate and positive expression of human sexuality. 'Cause you're post basically seems to be saying "NOPE YOU'RE WRONG" to Sam-


But *all* Sam said was: "

meanwhile off in the real world porn can and does get created which is a perfectly legitimate and positive expression of human sexuality"

... So.. actually I'm not sure what your point was anymore.

At no point did sam say there *wasn't* exploitative porn. You seem to object to his statement that not all porn is exploitative.

But then you admit "Yep, not all porn's exploitative".

Do you consider Sam to be one of the types to go "Well, not all Porn's Exploitative, so EXPLOITATIVE PORN IS OKAY!"? 'Cause I admit I don't really see anything like that in his statement.
_________________
"No, but evil is still being --Is having reason-- Being reasonable! Mousie understands? Is always being reason. Is punishing world for not being... Like in head. Is always reason. World should be different, is reason."
-Ed, from Digger
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Monkey Mcdermott



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 3152

PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 4:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not responsible for what you think i'm "sort of implying". If all you can come up with is "sort of implying" fucking ask for clarification.

Here's how the dance goes.

Tat posts a porn-negative comic.

Sam posts something about it linking back to sex-negative feminism, points out that there's some porn out there that is a legitimate positive expression of human sexuality.

I point out that those sites are outnumbered massively, usually by issuing a challenge no one ever takes me up on because they know damn well that porn that is a positive expression of human sexuality is actually a lot less common than degrading exploitation porn. This then dovetails into "and even so, how does this other stuff existing mitigate the effects of the horrid shit, which is way more common and people are way more likely to be exposed to when exploring porn for the first time?"

Usually there's someone who hasn't been involved in these back and forths who likes to jump in as though its the first time this exact conversation had been had. That's you this time.


Long and the short of it is until the degrading exploitation shit isn't the norm, putting a little asterisk next to porn of the "legitimate and positive expressions of human sexuality" type is pretty much useless for any real discussion about the product, except for making consumers of that product feel ok about it.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
anti-prophet



Joined: 19 Feb 2012
Posts: 73

PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 4:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It is useless unless used to point the way twords it, the non exploitive kind, or raise awareness of it. Although overpopulization of something that is not exploitive can cause it to become exploited, so sort of a double edged sword.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ktern



Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 944

PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 4:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

imagine if you go to a restaurant and order a dish and it arrives and it's mostly shit, like literally. but hey, there's some actual food in there. is this uncool

now imagine if there's only a bit of feces in there. would you eat it now

the reason "porn is exploitative and degrading" is a legit argument against porn as a whole as it currently exists is that right now what's happening is pretty much the first case
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yrvani



Joined: 01 Apr 2013
Posts: 101

PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There's even feminist porn.

I'd like to argue that it's a bit like factory work before unions. There was child labour, slavery, horrible abuse. Did this mean that factories were inherently bad? Not necessarily. Getting unions and worker's rights and regulations in place removed most of the bad stuff (until we decided to hop on the globalization train but that's a different topic).

Banning porn wouldn't help much. It'd still exist, but move elsewhere, and some people do like working in porn. Advocating for proper unions and protection would be more constructive than being puritan about it.
_________________
\m/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fritterdonut



Joined: 24 Jul 2012
Posts: 1082
Location: Hedonism

PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 6:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm pretty sure that banning pornography would make it even more derogatory and exploitative, similar to how banning prostitution led to the rise of exploitative and abusive pimps.

Not to mention it would make it much, much more dangerous, as the relatively stringent STI testing that is currently done in the porn industry would disappear, putting pornography actors in very real danger of contracting life threatening diseases like HIV, syphilis, etc.

Then again, who here was actually calling for a ban on pornography?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Raal



Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Posts: 51

PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lol nice.
But whats the message of this? Sex is generally misogynistic? Or that it impossible to make porn not degrading to women?

EDIT:
oh, I should have read page 3, you are already there. *slowpoke*
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ShadowCell



Joined: 03 Aug 2008
Posts: 5897
Location: California

PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Monkey Mcdermott wrote:
Long and the short of it is until the degrading exploitation shit isn't the norm, putting a little asterisk next to porn of the "legitimate and positive expressions of human sexuality" type is pretty much useless for any real discussion about the product, except for making consumers of that product feel ok about it.


ktern wrote:
the reason "porn is exploitative and degrading" is a legit argument against porn as a whole as it currently exists is that right now what's happening is pretty much the first case


that is true, but it's also important not to lose sight of the distinction between porn as it is now--call it The Porn Industry or Porn, Inc or mainstream porn or porn culture or whatever--and the entire vast human experience of pornography. mainstream porn is generally horrible and exploitative one way or another, absolutely, and it has a role in propping up all kinds of nasty shit values and assumptions and cultural tropes elsewhere too.

but losing sight of that distinction means you've taken a weird and roundabout route into the camp of the people who judge women for what they do with their bodies and police their sexualities. which means when it comes to a different problem, you're part of it, and that's a pretty dumb bargain to make.

the point isn't to overlook or apologize for all the horrible things about mainstream porn. the point is to make sure that you don't wind up propping up one piece of cultural misogyny while trying to knock down another.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Pixi-san



Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 79

PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fritterdonut, love your avatar. Have you read the comic?

When I think of female friendly porn , this comes to mind :

http://submissiveguycomics.tumblr.com/
(erm , its work safe... I think .... )

Now, seeing Tat explore a FLR relationship would be interesting...

...and probably blow Slicks and Squigs mind.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sam



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 9187

PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 10:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Monkey Mcdermott wrote:
I love ya Sam but care to bet i can go 3 for 1 on horrible exploitative hate fantasy porn sites vs legitimate positive expression of human sexuality porn sites?


The bet (as this 'part of the dance' or whatever) wouldn't really be relevant to my point, and wasn't before, tbh. I can see no other way that the porn industry in general would have become what it is without the extraordinarily countercultural and seedy deviance applied to it both as an entity and as an industry.

Quote:
Long and the short of it is until the degrading exploitation shit isn't the norm, putting a little asterisk next to porn of the "legitimate and positive expressions of human sexuality" type is pretty much useless for any real discussion about the product, except for making consumers of that product feel ok about it.


I've said this before: there is a very important real discussion about porn which the existence of said "legitimate and positive expressions of human sexuality" is centrally important to, and that's whether it is categorically bad, and what the implications of considering it categorically bad are. One of the most important implications brought up here very distinctly is that sexuality policing thing. Doubly important considering the inextricable presence of porn in most people's sexual development these days you will never get rid of porn, ever, so how does one mitigate the effects? What regulatory and social methodology can improve the situation we have today? What larger implications apply to our general evolution of social mores, sexual social politics, ingrained sexism, and attitudes regarding sex?

If you sincerely think that pointing out the issue of sexuality policing re: categorical anti pornography is useless for any real discussion about the product, you would have to be ignoring all but a narrow range of 'real discussions.' Probably reflexively, by assuming that it shares the same hallmarks as pathological defenses of exploitative systems and so must have its potential merits shackled by that. Porn is even being studied anthropologically. There are tons of discussions to be had in which criticizing the notion of pornography being inherently bad is greatly important.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Felgraf



Joined: 10 Jul 2012
Posts: 645

PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 1:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Monkey Mcdermott wrote:
I'm not responsible for what you think i'm "sort of implying". If all you can come up with is "sort of implying" fucking ask for clarification.

Here's how the dance goes.

Tat posts a porn-negative comic.

Sam posts something about it linking back to sex-negative feminism, points out that there's some porn out there that is a legitimate positive expression of human sexuality.

I point out that those sites are outnumbered massively, usually by issuing a challenge no one ever takes me up on because they know damn well that porn that is a positive expression of human sexuality is actually a lot less common than degrading exploitation porn. This then dovetails into "and even so, how does this other stuff existing mitigate the effects of the horrid shit, which is way more common and people are way more likely to be exposed to when exploring porn for the first time?"

Usually there's someone who hasn't been involved in these back and forths who likes to jump in as though its the first time this exact conversation had been had. That's you this time.


Long and the short of it is until the degrading exploitation shit isn't the norm, putting a little asterisk next to porn of the "legitimate and positive expressions of human sexuality" type is pretty much useless for any real discussion about the product, except for making consumers of that product feel ok about it.


Okay, but if we stick with ALL PORN IS BAD PERIOD, then people who *want* to make non-exploitative stuff won't, because they'll be harrangued and grouped with *the people that make the terrible things*.
_________________
"No, but evil is still being --Is having reason-- Being reasonable! Mousie understands? Is always being reason. Is punishing world for not being... Like in head. Is always reason. World should be different, is reason."
-Ed, from Digger
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Monkey Mcdermott



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 3152

PostPosted: Wed Aug 21, 2013 2:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sam wrote:
Monkey Mcdermott wrote:
I love ya Sam but care to bet i can go 3 for 1 on horrible exploitative hate fantasy porn sites vs legitimate positive expression of human sexuality porn sites?


The bet (as this 'part of the dance' or whatever) wouldn't really be relevant to my point, and wasn't before, tbh. I can see no other way that the porn industry in general would have become what it is without the extraordinarily countercultural and seedy deviance applied to it both as an entity and as an industry.

Quote:
Long and the short of it is until the degrading exploitation shit isn't the norm, putting a little asterisk next to porn of the "legitimate and positive expressions of human sexuality" type is pretty much useless for any real discussion about the product, except for making consumers of that product feel ok about it.


I've said this before: there is a very important real discussion about porn which the existence of said "legitimate and positive expressions of human sexuality" is centrally important to, and that's whether it is categorically bad, and what the implications of considering it categorically bad are. One of the most important implications brought up here very distinctly is that sexuality policing thing. Doubly important considering the inextricable presence of porn in most people's sexual development these days you will never get rid of porn, ever, so how does one mitigate the effects? What regulatory and social methodology can improve the situation we have today? What larger implications apply to our general evolution of social mores, sexual social politics, ingrained sexism, and attitudes regarding sex?

If you sincerely think that pointing out the issue of sexuality policing re: categorical anti pornography is useless for any real discussion about the product, you would have to be ignoring all but a narrow range of 'real discussions.' Probably reflexively, by assuming that it shares the same hallmarks as pathological defenses of exploitative systems and so must have its potential merits shackled by that. Porn is even being studied anthropologically. There are tons of discussions to be had in which criticizing the notion of pornography being inherently bad is greatly important.


Yeah, I haven't made that case either. The only case I have EVER made is that the vast majority of it is degrading, exploitative, and steeped pretty heavily in woman as plaything and object rather than person.

Nor do I think porn will ever be gotten rid of entirely, nor do I think it should be. I do think that the current broad base of porn has a negative effect on young folks with limited experience with real sex. I think it builds unrealistic expectations, and reinforces the attitudes of women as sexual playthings. Granted, the only thing I have that makes me believe that is every interaction I've ever had with guys age 15 to 25 who are open consumers of pornography, and the experience of having to overcome those lessons as an adult.

However, I do think that whenever something porn negative is brought up, rushing in with "not all porn..." is kind of a lot like all the dudes who rushed in with "but the menfolk suffer tooo!" in a discussion about womens problems. True, but not entirely germane, especially given the past history of the character in question in this comic.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> Sinfest All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group