Porn

99 posts / 0 new
Last post
potrokin
Offline
Joined: 28-05-16
Apr 28 2017 23:39
Porn

What do people on here think about it?

zugzwang
Offline
Joined: 25-11-16
Apr 29 2017 01:38

Isn't that a Cure album? Haven't heard it before. Not the biggest Cure fan.

radicalgraffiti
Offline
Joined: 4-11-07
Apr 29 2017 03:24

depends doesn't it? i mean, its kind of like saying "films what do you think?"

zugzwang
Offline
Joined: 25-11-16
Apr 29 2017 03:57

Well, I think the selling of yourself in order to survive whether it's in the sex industry or anywhere should be done away with.

potrokin
Offline
Joined: 28-05-16
Apr 29 2017 12:23
radicalgraffiti wrote:
depends doesn't it? i mean, its kind of like saying "films what do you think?"

If you like porn yes. Kinda.

Serge Forward's picture
Serge Forward
Offline
Joined: 14-01-04
Apr 29 2017 08:45

Most porn is generally very poor: yer lowest common denominator, staid, hetro-normative rubbish. Occasionally though one can find something half decent among the heap of "hard core" flicks. These days though, I really can't be arsed with it all and tend to just crack one off without any multimedia assistance.

potrokin
Offline
Joined: 28-05-16
Apr 29 2017 12:22

Well this is rather disappointing. So far only one of you has stated that you are anti.

radicalgraffiti
Offline
Joined: 4-11-07
Apr 29 2017 12:38
potrokin wrote:
radicalgraffiti wrote:
depends doesn't it? i mean, its kind of like saying "films what do you think?"

If you like porn yes. Kinda.

i wouldn't have though you needed to like porn to know there was a difference between pornographic writings, drawings, animations, photos, video recordings, live performances, porn produced by corporations, by workers cooperatives, individuals etc

Serge Forward's picture
Serge Forward
Offline
Joined: 14-01-04
Apr 29 2017 12:55
potrokin wrote:
Well this is rather disappointing. So far only one of you has stated that you are anti.

Potrokin, the AF's Organise! magazine, issue 59 from 2002 might be worth a read:
anarchism and sex

potrokin
Offline
Joined: 28-05-16
Apr 29 2017 13:11
Serge Forward wrote:
potrokin wrote:
Well this is rather disappointing. So far only one of you has stated that you are anti.

Potrokin, the AF's Organise! magazine, issue 59 from 2002 might be worth a read:
anarchism and sex

Organise is always a great read, cheers. I might have to buy a copy or subscribe actually.

potrokin
Offline
Joined: 28-05-16
Apr 30 2017 12:55
radicalgraffiti wrote:
potrokin wrote:
radicalgraffiti wrote:
depends doesn't it? i mean, its kind of like saying "films what do you think?"

If you like porn yes. Kinda.

i wouldn't have though you needed to like porn to know there was a difference between pornographic writings, drawings, animations, photos, video recordings, live performances, porn produced by corporations, by workers cooperatives, individuals etc

I don't have a problem with erotica, as long it doesn't promote any kind of abusive behaviour in any way. I think porn films and magazines are very exploitative though and open to abuse. People do it to make money and end up with STD's. I think the figure is something like 1 in 4 porn performers have an STD, and they continue to work in the business to carry on making money. I would say that anti-female attitudes are prevalent in the industry and in the films and magazines too. Something I found really sinister that I was reading about recently was cases of women being blackmailed into it. The women thought it was just modelling and signed contracts and then were threatened with violence and rape to comply. Because they had signed a contract, they were threatened with legal action aswell.Then you hear stories about porn actresses being assaulted on set aswell, I believe there was one such case in the media recently. Other than that I think it's something that exploits lonely, probably depressed people to make profit. And an individual and even a worker's co-op can be exploitative. So thats why I'm anti.

radicalgraffiti
Offline
Joined: 4-11-07
Apr 29 2017 16:00
potrokin wrote:
radicalgraffiti wrote:
potrokin wrote:
radicalgraffiti wrote:
depends doesn't it? i mean, its kind of like saying "films what do you think?"

If you like porn yes. Kinda.

i wouldn't have though you needed to like porn to know there was a difference between pornographic writings, drawings, animations, photos, video recordings, live performances, porn produced by corporations, by workers cooperatives, individuals etc

I don't have a problem with erotica, as long it doesn't promote any kind of abusive behaviour in any way. I think porn films and magazines are very exploitative though and open to abuse. People do it to make money and end up with STD's. I think the figure is something like 1 in 4 porn performers have an STD, and they continue to work in the business to carry on making money. I would say that anti-female attitudes are prevalent in the industry and in the films and magazines too. Something I found really sinister that I was reading about recently was cases of women being blackmailed into it. The women thought it was just modelling and signed contracts and then were threatened with violence and rape to comply. Then you hear stories about porn actresses being assaulted on set aswell, I believe there was one such case in the media recently. Other than that I think it's something that exploits lonely, probably depressed people to make profit. And an individual and even a worker's co-op can be exploitative. So thats why I'm anti.

most of that is capitalism + misogyny though, its not something unique to porn and i can find you loads of examples of workers in other industries being abused and tricked too.

and you last point is just wrong, you appear to be conflating exploitation with alienation, exploitation is when some makes money from the labour of others, alienation is what happens when you are doing something not because you want to, or because you desire the result of what you are doing but because its a way of obtains something else you need, usually money, although i guess other things like having to read a book for school also alienates people from it

Red Marriott's picture
Red Marriott
Offline
Joined: 7-05-06
Apr 29 2017 16:22
Serge wrote:
These days though, I really can't be arsed with it all and tend to just crack one off without any multimedia assistance.

Good to see the old traditions being kept alive.

Chilli Sauce's picture
Chilli Sauce
Offline
Joined: 5-10-07
Apr 29 2017 17:12

You got to hand it to Serge, an old awristocrat like him, he's not gonna let tradition just slip through his fingers.

potrokin
Offline
Joined: 28-05-16
Apr 29 2017 18:03
radicalgraffiti wrote:
potrokin wrote:
radicalgraffiti wrote:
potrokin wrote:
radicalgraffiti wrote:
depends doesn't it? i mean, its kind of like saying "films what do you think?"

If you like porn yes. Kinda.

i wouldn't have though you needed to like porn to know there was a difference between pornographic writings, drawings, animations, photos, video recordings, live performances, porn produced by corporations, by workers cooperatives, individuals etc

I don't have a problem with erotica, as long it doesn't promote any kind of abusive behaviour in any way. I think porn films and magazines are very exploitative though and open to abuse. People do it to make money and end up with STD's. I think the figure is something like 1 in 4 porn performers have an STD, and they continue to work in the business to carry on making money. I would say that anti-female attitudes are prevalent in the industry and in the films and magazines too. Something I found really sinister that I was reading about recently was cases of women being blackmailed into it. The women thought it was just modelling and signed contracts and then were threatened with violence and rape to comply. Then you hear stories about porn actresses being assaulted on set aswell, I believe there was one such case in the media recently. Other than that I think it's something that exploits lonely, probably depressed people to make profit. And an individual and even a worker's co-op can be exploitative. So thats why I'm anti.

most of that is capitalism + misogyny though, its not something unique to porn and i can find you loads of examples of workers in other industries being abused and tricked too.

and you last point is just wrong, you appear to be conflating exploitation with alienation, exploitation is when some makes money from the labour of others, alienation is what happens when you are doing something not because you want to, or because you desire the result of what you are doing but because its a way of obtains something else you need, usually money, although i guess other things like having to read a book for school also alienates people from it

I'd say most industries don't harm or exploit people in the same way that porn does. Most industries (and porn is only an industry because of capitalism) don't spread STDs amongst it's workers. As for your second point as I'd say that the people buying or relying on porn are being conned and used to use a product- the fact that it is made into a product and sold on the market is the only reason it is legal. It exploits people who pay for it (I realise that alot of it is available free online) but also it effects people's psychology and their brain chemistry- there have been some interesting groundbreaking studies on that in recent times.

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Apr 29 2017 19:27
Quote:
I'd say most industries don't harm or exploit people in the same way that porn does.

How do you know? Does porn harm or exploit people any worse than say, textile workers in Bangladesh? Or e-waste recycling plants in Ghana or China? It seems to be that you're arguing from a moral point of view more than anything else (which is fine, but people who do not share those morals will disagree)

Quote:
Most industries (and porn is only an industry because of capitalism) don't spread STDs amongst it's workers.

Sure, most industries don't, but trucking for example have, at least in developing countries, been one of the main causes for spreading HIV/AIDS not just among its own workers, but also to communities where it wasn't prevalent. Of course, for this the trucking industry is closely tied to prostitution.

Quote:
As for your second point as I'd say that the people buying or relying on porn are being conned and used to use a product- the fact that it is made into a product and sold on the market is the only reason it is legal.

This is poor argumentation. There are plenty of commodities that are sold on the market that is illegal; there is no difference between so-called "legal" and "illegal" commodities from a purely economic point of view (yes, I recognize the benefits and drawbacks of being legal/illegal).

Quote:
it effects people's psychology and their brain chemistry- there have been some interesting groundbreaking studies on that in recent times.

This is important in these days when kids get access to the internet at a very young age; I wonder what these studies will look like in a few years when more people have grown up digital.

Sike
Offline
Joined: 25-10-15
Apr 30 2017 08:06
potrokin wrote:
Well this is rather disappointing. So far only one of you has stated that you are anti.

Yeah, I think that it's messed up when anyone feels themselves compelled to sell their bodies in order to put bread on the table but that's basically the nature of labor under capitalist social relations. When the day comes that workers are able to fulfill their basic needs (shelter, nutrition, medical, etc.) without being compelled to service the whims of others for remuneration then commercial erotica will inevitably face a steep decline, as will others service industries, but that's not going to happen until capitalism is entirely replaced with a more equitable system of economics.

Sike
Offline
Joined: 25-10-15
Apr 30 2017 08:16
tane_mahuta wrote:

@tane_mahuta

What's with the sexist quote? It looks like something that some alt-right arsehole would print out and turn into a poster that he could hang up on his bedroom wall.

Craftwork's picture
Craftwork
Offline
Joined: 26-12-15
Apr 30 2017 10:26

To be precise, they are not "selling their bodies", they are selling a service.

tane_mahuta
Offline
Joined: 28-04-17
Apr 30 2017 11:38
Sike wrote:
tane_mahuta wrote:

@tane_mahuta

What's with the sexist quote? It looks like something that some alt-right arsehole would print out and turn into a poster that he could hang up on his bedroom wall.

That's the joke

cactus9
Offline
Joined: 9-12-14
Apr 30 2017 17:09

Porn is grim.

Sike
Offline
Joined: 25-10-15
Apr 30 2017 18:02
Craftwork wrote:
To be precise, they are not "selling their bodies", they are selling a service.

Yeah, that's better way of putting it. One could also say that they are selling their time.

Sike
Offline
Joined: 25-10-15
Apr 30 2017 18:03
tane_mahuta wrote:
Sike wrote:
tane_mahuta wrote:

@tane_mahuta

What's with the sexist quote? It looks like something that some alt-right arsehole would print out and turn into a poster that he could hang up on his bedroom wall.

That's the joke

I see.

Auld-bod's picture
Auld-bod
Offline
Joined: 9-07-11
May 1 2017 03:22

While not disagreeing with the article, ‘Anarchism and sex’, in Organise #59, nowhere does it actually state what is meant by ‘pornography’. The examples in the article imply a multitude of meanings.

According to a TV series broadcast some years ago, I think on Channel 4, the word only arose in the Victorian era with the invention of cheap printing and photography. This meant that the lower classes could get access to the erotic material previously only viewed by the ‘educated’ elite.

As stated in other posts, porn - I mean material meant to sexually stimulate or titillate, comes in many forms. In my opinion the ‘erotic’ work of Jeff Koons is dire, while Gustav Klimt’s, particularly his sketch books are both beautiful and sexually charged.

The same thing applies to literature and movies. It serves no purpose to be for or against ‘pornography’, as sexuality will express itself, and the multitude of forms it takes reflects our society.

The Victorian were very against ‘porn’ and chose to chisel off the genitalia from many ancient statues. Channel 4 showed a museum room full of trestle tables displaying the offending items. Sexual hypocrisy has always been a preoccupation of the British ruling class.

jef costello's picture
jef costello
Offline
Joined: 9-02-06
Apr 30 2017 21:10

Porn in itself is not necessarily a bad thing, I think if we can get past the current hang-ups about sex then I don't see why porn couldn't be produced in a communist society, not sure we'd need it though.
Porn isn't by it's nature exploitative but it is commodification and it is alienating.
In practise it's a pretty horrible business in many ways, but I think that our notions of sex mean that it seems worse to have sex for money on camera rather than all the other things we do for money.

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Apr 30 2017 22:11
Quote:
I don't see why porn couldn't be produced in a communist society, not sure we'd need it though

There will always be some exhibitionists and voyeurs.

S. Artesian
Offline
Joined: 5-02-09
May 1 2017 03:08
Quote:
I don't see why porn couldn't be produced in a communist society, not sure we'd need it though.

Well, that means the "porn" would be able to exist as porn without its commercial status. I think that is highly problematic; pornography without commercialism is, IMO, an oxymoron. Associated with its commercial status, of course, is its treatment of women (leaving aside, for the moment, homosexual porn, transgender porn-- the permutations are almost endless; boggles the mind, really). The "selling point" and the selling point to the "target market" involves pretty much consistent, persistent, insistent degradation of women (yeah, yeah, I know-- not always "What about BDSM porn with dominant women?" Short answer-- put that with the other stuff for future review).

Not for nothing that the money shot is called the money shot, you know?

K wrote:
There will always be some exhibitionists and voyeurs.

Yeah, but is there always going to be a market; a commercial conversion of need, or use, into exchange and value?

Porn's a commercial endeavor, top to bottom, front to back, you should pardon the puns, and I don't know if it can ever be separated from that commercial basis.

As for its treatment of its workers-- I'm sure they are exploited, and treated like meat, with probably the very same wage differentials that prevail in other industries-- where men make more than women, etc. etc. But as far as risk to workers-- sure, mining coal or working for a railroad doesn't put you in an environment where STD's are easily communicable, but there are these other risks... like black lung, like losing a limb in a derailment, or getting coupled up between cars.

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
May 1 2017 02:09
Quote:
Yeah, but is there always going to be a market; a commercial conversion of need, or use, into exchange and value?

If we're talking about a communist society,then of course not. Some folks will film themselves having sex and will share it on commie YouTube.

S. Artesian
Offline
Joined: 5-02-09
May 1 2017 03:07
Khawaga wrote:
Quote:
Yeah, but is there always going to be a market; a commercial conversion of need, or use, into exchange and value?

If we're talking about a communist society,then of course not. Some folks will film themselves having sex and will share it on commie YouTube.

And that won't be pornography

radicalgraffiti
Offline
Joined: 4-11-07
May 1 2017 03:48
S. Artesian wrote:
Khawaga wrote:
Quote:
Yeah, but is there always going to be a market; a commercial conversion of need, or use, into exchange and value?

If we're talking about a communist society,then of course not. Some folks will film themselves having sex and will share it on commie YouTube.

And that won't be pornography

so you saying that porn is exactly what it needs to be to support the argument that porn is bad, and anything that doesn't support the porn is bad argument isn't porn even if everyone calls it porn and uses it the same why they'd use porn

zugzwang
Offline
Joined: 25-11-16
May 1 2017 04:30
S. Artesian wrote:
Quote:
I don't see why porn couldn't be produced in a communist society, not sure we'd need it though.

Well, that means the "porn" would be able to exist as porn without its commercial status. I think that is highly problematic; pornography without commercialism is, IMO, an oxymoron. Associated with its commercial status, of course, is its treatment of women (leaving aside, for the moment, homosexual porn, transgender porn-- the permutations are almost endless; boggles the mind, really). The "selling point" and the selling point to the "target market" involves pretty much consistent, persistent, insistent degradation of women (yeah, yeah, I know-- not always "What about BDSM porn with dominant women?" Short answer-- put that with the other stuff for future review).

Not for nothing that the money shot is called the money shot, you know?

There's already non-commercial pornography, i.e. free of charge/no paying involved, just like there's non-commercial software. I don't really need to list all the services for that.

The selling of your labor (in this case sexual) or entering into a contract with some pornographic company, if that's what you mean, I don't believe is some requirement for pornography to exist, which encompasses a lot of different things as already pointed out (images, drawings, audio, literature, video games, etc.)