Porn

99 posts / 0 new
Last post
freemind
Offline
Joined: 10-10-08
May 1 2017 08:05

Quality

freemind
Offline
Joined: 10-10-08
May 1 2017 08:16

Quality from ChilliSauce Re;Fingers lol

Reddebrek's picture
Reddebrek
Offline
Joined: 4-01-12
May 1 2017 11:53
Khawaga wrote:
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.

Well there was that communist exile from Yugoslavia who made films with explicit sex scenes about the nature of capitalism, and the benefits of communism.

In general terms I think its important to look at what Sex workers themselves have to say. I do find it weird how these discussion tend to look at every other angle but the Sex worker point of view.

All organizations for sex workers I've come across have been clear that its a form of work like any other and most of the extra dangers and difficulties like STI's are a result of illegality and social stigma.

An objection to the sex industry as an industry seems perfectly uncontroversial, so long as we understand that it won't be abolished without also abolishing the others.

S. Artesian
Offline
Joined: 5-02-09
May 1 2017 12:46

First off, I never said "porn is bad." I said porn is intrinsically connected with commercialization, and the commercialization is deeply connected with the subjugation of women.

A couple making a film of themselves having sex is not necessarily pornography.. Think about it-- a big challenge, I know, but give it a try. Is every depiction of sexual intercourse pornographic?

Yes, no? If no, then what distinguishes the pornographic depictions?

Quote:
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.

Just because a fee is not charged for an individual or individuals does not mean it's not a commercial endeavor. Ever get "free" samples of anything? Two-fers? Comps? Teasers?

The adage about heroin dealing? "First taste is free."

When we talk about pornography, we're talking about an industry that produces pornography.

Again it's not for nothing that the climax (!) of a porn film is called the "money shot."

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
May 1 2017 15:26
Quote:
And that won't be pornography

I'd agree with that in the sense that porn can be understood as something inherently capitalist that is based on all sorts of misogyny, racism etc. The, erm, "narrative" and "aesthetics" would change.I'd presume. Then again, people might still call it pornography even though it's completely different from what we have today.

Quote:
Just because a fee is not charged for an individual or individuals does not mean it's not a commercial endeavor. Ever get "free" samples of anything? Two-fers? Comps? Teasers?

The adage about heroin dealing? "First taste is free."

Well, there are people who upload photo and video of themselves for free and don't care to charge for it later either. But it's usually uploaded to some commercial platform (that doesn't have to be about porn), which typically is all about gaining as many users as possible prior to some IPO.

Free porn is kinda like piracy. You may download or stream what you want, but those sites may make bank from the advertisement it presents to you.

Auld-bod's picture
Auld-bod
Offline
Joined: 9-07-11
May 1 2017 15:28

S. Artesian #36

I think your definition of what constitutes ‘porn’ suggests you disapprove of the industry. From what I know I tend to agree with you. However, I think your ‘we’re talking about an industry that produces pornography’ is far too restrictive and instead ‘the industry’ should be seen as a large sub-set inside a larger set of pornography.

I think explicit material relating to sexual relations with children pornographic, even if freely shared between individuals.

You ask in your post, if a couple making a film of themselves having sex could be considered porn. Well if it is made available for viewing (consumption) then my answer is yes. A sub-set of enthusiastic amateurs is not I think, too dissimilar to wage earning professionals – in content and desired reaction of the audience. Presumably the amateurs may be less predictable, than the porn machine (?).

Is every act of sexual intercourse porn? No. Nor is the depiction of sexual intercourse necessarily pornographic. Hindu temples being an example. The ‘eye of the beholder’ plays a large part in our attitudes, therefore the context is important – both class and cultural. Recently on ‘Time Team’ a large Neolithic stone penis was discovered – and was described as a phallus. Presumably it was hoped the uneducated would fail to realise they were handling a cock! I could only laugh.

zugzwang
Offline
Joined: 25-11-16
May 1 2017 17:04
S. Artesian wrote:
Quote:
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.

Just because a fee is not charged for an individual or individuals does not mean it's not a commercial endeavor. Ever get "free" samples of anything? Two-fers? Comps? Teasers?

The adage about heroin dealing? "First taste is free."

When we talk about pornography, we're talking about an industry that produces pornography.

Again it's not for nothing that the climax (!) of a porn film is called the "money shot."

No, I mean completely non-commercial. I'm not one to usually quote Wiki, and this is all very smutty for my tastes, but:

Quote:
More recently, sites such as [blah blah blah] have served as repositories for home-made or semi-professional pornography, made available free by its creators (who could be called exhibitionists). It has presented a significant challenge to the commercial pornographic film industry.

Quote:
Non-commercial pornography
In addition to the porn industry, there is a large amount of non-commercial pornography. This should be distinguished from commercial pornography falsely marketed as featuring "amateurs".

And this is not to mention all the other pornographic forms like drawings, video games and so on that are not commercial. I don't think pornography is really a problem as far as communism goes, pornography galore.

radicalgraffiti
Offline
Joined: 4-11-07
May 1 2017 17:32

kind of related i saw this earlier today

Quote:
SWARM is a collective founded and led by sex workers who believe in self-determination, solidarity and co-operation.

https://www.swarmcollective.org/

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
May 1 2017 19:22

admin note: comment from tane_mahuta removed as it wasn't clear what was meant by it and it didn't add to the discussion

Craftwork's picture
Craftwork
Offline
Joined: 26-12-15
May 1 2017 22:39

Wilhelm Reich wrote:

in a society which lacks any incentive for sexual oppression - or historically considered, as long as, and as far as, a society has no such interest - that society will be free of sexual misery. We could say, then, that the members of that society experience a life which is sexually economical - a statement which implies no value judgment but, rather, refers to the fact that there is a well-ordered patterning of their sexual energy.

Communism should be 'sexually economical'. Better education, awareness and more honesty/openness (as well as not working 40+ hours a week, stressing about rent/mortgage/bills, etc.), greater acceptance of the fact that traditional forms of relationship (heterosexual monogamy - "the norm") might not suit everybody and a greater acceptance of non-traditional relationships, all these ought to enable people to have better relationship/sex lives. And this ought to reduce the demand for substitutes.

S. Artesian
Offline
Joined: 5-02-09
May 2 2017 01:53
Quote:
Communism should be 'sexually economical'. Better education, awareness and more honesty/openness (as well as not working 40+ hours a week, stressing about rent/mortgage/bills, etc.), greater acceptance of the fact that traditional forms of relationship (heterosexual monogamy - "the norm") might not suit everybody and a greater acceptance of non-traditional relationships, all these ought to enable people to have better relationship/sex lives. And this ought to reduce the demand for substitutes.

Left out the most important element in the reduction in repression-- and that is the withering away, or abolition, of the (thermo)nuclear family.

Sike's picture
Sike
Offline
Joined: 25-10-15
May 2 2017 04:19

Any know if there is any particular reason why the term "sex workers" rather then "sex industry workers" seems to be the commonly accepted nomenclature to define workers employed in the providing of sexually related services? Could it be said that workers employed in providing sexually related services are basically service sector workers?

Fleur
Offline
Joined: 21-02-12
May 2 2017 11:18
Quote:
Any know if there is any particular reason why the term "sex workers" rather then "sex industry workers" seems to be the commonly accepted nomenclature to define workers employed in the providing of sexually related services?

Probably because it's shorter, in the same way that fast food workers is commonly used instead of fast food industry workers or where I live which is dominated by the aerospace industry, aerospace workers as opposed to aerospace industry workers.

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
May 2 2017 21:51

This is revolutionary porn. DEATH TO THE FASCIST INSECT!

https://youtu.be/_E2cJ9gbWnQ

Sike's picture
Sike
Offline
Joined: 25-10-15
May 4 2017 01:42
Fleur wrote:
Probably because it's shorter, in the same way that fast food workers is commonly used instead of fast food industry workers or where I live which is dominated by the aerospace industry, aerospace workers as opposed to aerospace industry workers.

Thank you for your answer, Fleur.

Rommon's picture
Rommon
Offline
Joined: 23-03-17
May 4 2017 03:44

I just want to add my two cents.

Sex is an extremely intimate act between two people, it's a very intimate and emotional way one can relate to another, this is one reasons rape is much worse than assault. What porn does is commodify sex, it does what capitalism always does. Porn is to sex what candy is to fruit, fruit has sugar, but it also has many nutrients that you need; candy is just sugar with nutrients, candy takes something good, and makes it damaging and, for some people, addictive.

Porn offers the instant pleasure of sex without the intimacy, it offers the pleasure but without the relationship. I think this is a problem for the same reason I think candy is bad for you, except moreso because of the intensity and emotional depth of sex.

Ultimately what capitalism does is corrupt what is good in life, "candifies it", and alients people, capitalism wants atomized consumers, and desperate workers; thats it. What it doesn't want Is people who are in relationship with one another, who love one another and who care about one another. They want to turn sex into a commodity consumption.

Not only that but much of porn basically teaches (especially Young boys) to have a very sick view of women, that women are something to be used, I don't know if there has been any social impact from the onset of internet porn, but I suspect there will be.

I think Alain Badiou was right when he talked about "love" being at risk in capitalism, I am pro love, pro sex, against porn.

Of course porn has always existed (in one form or another) and probably always will, but what capitalism has done with it is something I'm completely against. If any one asked me I would recommend to stay away from porn, go out and fall in love and have sex.

potrokin
Offline
Joined: 28-05-16
May 4 2017 08:51
Rommon wrote:
I just want to add my two cents.

Sex is an extremely intimate act between two people, it's a very intimate and emotional way one can relate to another, this is one reasons rape is much worse than assault. What porn does is commodify sex, it does what capitalism always does. Porn is to sex what candy is to fruit, fruit has sugar, but it also has many nutrients that you need; candy is just sugar with nutrients, candy takes something good, and makes it damaging and, for some people, addictive.

Porn offers the instant pleasure of sex without the intimacy, it offers the pleasure but without the relationship. I think this is a problem for the same reason I think candy is bad for you, except moreso because of the intensity and emotional depth of sex.

Ultimately what capitalism does is corrupt what is good in life, "candifies it", and alients people, capitalism wants atomized consumers, and desperate workers; thats it. What it doesn't want Is people who are in relationship with one another, who love one another and who care about one another. They want to turn sex into a commodity consumption.

Not only that but much of porn basically teaches (especially Young boys) to have a very sick view of women, that women are something to be used, I don't know if there has been any social impact from the onset of internet porn, but I suspect there will be.

I think Alain Badiou was right when he talked about "love" being at risk in capitalism, I am pro love, pro sex, against porn.

Of course porn has always existed (in one form or another) and probably always will, but what capitalism has done with it is something I'm completely against. If any one asked me I would recommend to stay away from porn, go out and fall in love and have sex.

We may have our differences about religion but I agree with you 100% on this. Well said.

Rommon's picture
Rommon
Offline
Joined: 23-03-17
May 4 2017 09:23
S. Artesian wrote:
Left out the most important element in the reduction in repression-- and that is the withering away, or abolition, of the (thermo)nuclear family.

I completely dissagree here; There's a reason why modern late Capitalism is A-OK With getting rid of the traditional Family, becuase the more People rely on the market for their needs, the more they are socailly atomized, the more they view themselves as individual consumers rather than anything else (fathers, mothers, daughters, neighbors, comrades, brothers, and so on) the better for Capitalism.

When I (as I often do) speak to market-fundamentalists or just People who still trust Capitalism about the possiblity of communism; one of the first examples I give is the Family, both Nuclear and extended. basically everything that happens in a (non-patriarchal, well functioning) Family is communistic.

Get rid of the Family and what you're left With is contract, i.e. marketized relationships. I personally think the idea that two People covenant together (excuse the theological Language) rather than merely contract is a good thing, I think relationships that are not mere contingencies but rather stable covenental bonds are good.

Craftwork's picture
Craftwork
Offline
Joined: 26-12-15
May 4 2017 13:48
S. Artesian wrote:
Quote:
Communism should be 'sexually economical'. Better education, awareness and more honesty/openness (as well as not working 40+ hours a week, stressing about rent/mortgage/bills, etc.), greater acceptance of the fact that traditional forms of relationship (heterosexual monogamy - "the norm") might not suit everybody and a greater acceptance of non-traditional relationships, all these ought to enable people to have better relationship/sex lives. And this ought to reduce the demand for substitutes.

Left out the most important element in the reduction in repression-- and that is the withering away, or abolition, of the (thermo)nuclear family.

I didn't leave it out - I consider this covered by the bit in bold.

Auld-bod's picture
Auld-bod
Offline
Joined: 9-07-11
May 5 2017 08:58

Rommon #47

‘Ultimately what capitalism does is corrupt what is good in life, "candifies it", and alients people, capitalism wants atomized consumers, and desperate workers; thats it. What it doesn't want Is people who are in relationship with one another, who love one another and who care about one another. They want to turn sex into a commodity consumption.’

I agree with much in your post, however I’d take issue with you on at least two matters that I think you oversimplify.

Capitalism exploits sex to maximise profit particularly through advertising. However all states, past and present, wish to exert as much control as possible over sexual matters. The UK was forced to legalise some forms of porn only due to its inability to control the internet. The ruling class is not one entity, rather it is waring competitors that require regulation by the state. In a liberal democracy the benefits to capitalism of the internet, outweighs the freedom of all forms of ‘undesirable’ expression, including porn (which the state does its best to tax).

I feel capitalism only wishes to profitably exploit people’s feelings, and it is largely irrelevant what form their relationship takes (this is uneven, as in the case of homosexuality in Russia). In the UK you may buy a card for any occasion. People spend thousands of pounds getting married - the more the better!

Love has always been problematic. Platonic love is relatively simple. Sexual love is another matter. Unfortunately I cannot see this changing even with free communism.

As Samuel Butler wrote:
‘God is Love, I dare say. But what a mischievous devil Love is.’

Rommon's picture
Rommon
Offline
Joined: 23-03-17
May 5 2017 10:20
Quote:
I feel capitalism only wishes to profitably exploit people’s feelings, and it is largely irrelevant what form their relationship takes (this is uneven, as in the case of homosexuality in Russia). In the UK you may buy a card for any occasion. People spend thousands of pounds getting married - the more the better!

I completely agree ... Capitalism commodifies everything, Even marriages, divorces everything.

With porn however it goes up to the most intimate relationship and distorts it. I agree sexual love is "problematic" in that it's risky and self-emptying, but; at least for me, it is a big part of what makes us human; the ability to truely love.

Quote:
Love has always been problematic. Platonic love is relatively simple. Sexual love is another matter. Unfortunately I cannot see this changing even with free communism.

As Samuel Butler wrote:
‘God is Love, I dare say. But what a mischievous devil Love is.’

From a theological perspective Platonic love is not Christian love, Chrisitan love is inherently self-empyting and giving.

Platonic love can be sexual, only in that you are masturbating With someone else, Real sexual love is self-giving, it's risky; that's what I am for.

potrokin
Offline
Joined: 28-05-16
May 19 2017 07:50

This short video explains the various addiction related brain changes that watching porn causes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmpTB-IxNyo

Fleur
Offline
Joined: 21-02-12
May 19 2017 13:22

The problem with this subject is that it is impossible to have this conversation without it being infused with people's own personal morality, something which is obvious in this thread. afaic my anarchist position now, not after any theoretical revolution, is to support workers in any industry, not just this one, in struggles for pay and conditions etc, not to moralize on how people should be getting off or to decide what sex should or should not be like. People are exploited, injured, endangered in all industries under capitalism but it's this idustry which seems to get singled out more often than not.

The above video is describing one of the biochemical processes of addiction. DeltaFosB is a trigger for all types of addictions and compulsive behaviours, cocaine, alcohol, exercise. It's not something specific to pornography addiction. Some people get addictions, some don't. Some people can enjoy a pint or going for a run, others become alcoholics or develop orthorexia. Addiction is a problem, raising your dopamine levels is not. Incidentally, without a regular supply of DeltaFosB you get depression.

Rommon's picture
Rommon
Offline
Joined: 23-03-17
May 19 2017 15:01

Every position is a moral position, Anarchism is a moral position, Socialism is a moral position, the fight against exploitation and oppression are all moral positions.

Zanthorus's picture
Zanthorus
Offline
Joined: 3-08-10
May 20 2017 13:04
S.Artesian wrote:
The "selling point" and the selling point to the "target market" involves pretty much consistent, persistent, insistent degradation of women

Except for the target market which isn't even sexually interested in women, ya know.

Or the target market which is sexually interested in representations of anthropomorphic animals, or depictions of men being swallowed whole, or giantesses. A huge part of pornography is the representation of desires which can't be acted out in real life. Witness how popular incest porn is.

Or when the target market market is women, or couples. Which is increasingly the case. Or when the porn is explicitly produced, filmed and distributed by women.

Craftwork wrote:
And this ought to reduce the demand for substitutes.

The assumption here is that porn is used as a substitute for real relationships. But I know guys in long term relationships that still watch porn every day, some even with their partners (Women also watch porn, again).

Rommon wrote:
Sex is an extremely intimate act between two people

Except when it isn't.

As for the rest of your post: "...true socialism, which is no longer concerned with real human beings but with “Man”, has lost all revolutionary enthusiasm and proclaims instead the universal love of mankind. It turns as a result not to the Proletarians but to the two most numerous classes of men in Germany, to the petty bourgeoisie with its philanthropic illusions and to the ideologists of this very same petty bourgeoisie: the philosophers and their disciples;"

Rommon wrote:
There's a reason why modern late Capitalism is A-OK With getting rid of the traditional Family

Again, no. 'Family values' is the watchword of social conservatives everywhere.

Capitalism destroying immediate, natural relations of dependence was a positive element in it's history.

Rommon's picture
Rommon
Offline
Joined: 23-03-17
May 22 2017 06:54
Zanthorus wrote:
Except when it isn't.

As for the rest of your post: "...true socialism, which is no longer concerned with real human beings but with “Man”, has lost all revolutionary enthusiasm and proclaims instead the universal love of mankind. It turns as a result not to the Proletarians but to the two most numerous classes of men in Germany, to the petty bourgeoisie with its philanthropic illusions and to the ideologists of this very same petty bourgeoisie: the philosophers and their disciples;"

I believe it is, by nature, intimate.

As for the rest of Your post, the quote, I'm not sure of it's relevancy.

Quote:
Again, no. 'Family values' is the watchword of social conservatives everywhere.

Capitalism destroying immediate, natural relations of dependence was a positive element in it's history.

I disagree, I think Family is a positive thing.

if what you want is alienation, but just based on something else other than market and Capital, I'm not With that, I think Natural relations of mutual dependence is a good thing, we depend on others anyway, there is no way around that, actually having real grounded communities, such as families is a good thing.

Reddebrek's picture
Reddebrek
Offline
Joined: 4-01-12
May 22 2017 10:04

I finally tracked down that Yugoslav director who made erotic propaganda, there were a lot of directors in the Black Wave movement. Dušan Makavejev https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Du%C5%A1an_Makavejev

As far as I know he did two films that tried to use sex to push a message, WR the mysteries of the Organism and (Produced in exile) Sweet Movie. If you want to track them down I'd just like to warn you Black Wave is basically the stereotype of Euro indie art cinema come to life.

potrokin
Offline
Joined: 28-05-16
May 22 2017 11:11
Rommon wrote:
Zanthorus wrote:
Except when it isn't.

As for the rest of your post: "...true socialism, which is no longer concerned with real human beings but with “Man”, has lost all revolutionary enthusiasm and proclaims instead the universal love of mankind. It turns as a result not to the Proletarians but to the two most numerous classes of men in Germany, to the petty bourgeoisie with its philanthropic illusions and to the ideologists of this very same petty bourgeoisie: the philosophers and their disciples;"

I believe it is, by nature, intimate.

As for the rest of Your post, the quote, I'm not sure of it's relevancy.

Quote:
Again, no. 'Family values' is the watchword of social conservatives everywhere.

Capitalism destroying immediate, natural relations of dependence was a positive element in it's history.

I disagree, I think Family is a positive thing.

if what you want is alienation, but just based on something else other than market and Capital, I'm not With that, I think Natural relations of mutual dependence is a good thing, we depend on others anyway, there is no way around that, actually having real grounded communities, such as families is a good thing.

It depends on what sort of family it is and whether you actually have much in common with your family.

Zanthorus's picture
Zanthorus
Offline
Joined: 3-08-10
May 22 2017 12:44
Rommon wrote:
I believe it is, by nature, intimate.

Well, go look up some videos of animals having sex with each other on National Geographic and then come back and report whether they seemed peturbed by being filmed.

'By nature', sex is something done out in the open, not for sentimental reasons, but because of a seasonal biological drive to reproduce. Humans are the ones that, in the course of social development, have ascribed it with mysterious, emotional and spiritual significance and made it more and more a private affair.

Rommon wrote:
if what you want is alienation

Ok, so in the first place, you need to define what you mean by alienation. Because alienation in Marx refers to the fact that the productive powers and products of of social labour appear to the producers as something external and alien to them, because they are owned and appropriated by capital.

"Since, before he enters the process, his own labour has already been alienated from him, appropriated by the capitalist, and incorporated with capital, it now, in the course of the process, constantly objectifies itself so that it becomes a product alien to him... Therefore the worker himself constantly produces objective wealth, in the form of capital, an alien power that dominates and exploits him." (Capital Volume 1, pp. 716)

What I want is the end of the specifically capitalist mode of production, it's replacement by "an association, in which the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all." This means by definition, the end of alienation, at least in it's specifically Marxist sense.

What you have in mind is some alternate conception of alienation, but I'll let you elaborate on that instead of making guesses as to your intention.

Rommon's picture
Rommon
Offline
Joined: 23-03-17
May 22 2017 13:03
Zanthorus wrote:
Well, go look up some videos of animals having sex with each other on National Geographic and then come back and report whether they seemed peturbed by being filmed.

'By nature', sex is something done out in the open, not for sentimental reasons, but because of a seasonal biological drive to reproduce. Humans are the ones that, in the course of social development, have ascribed it with mysterious, emotional and spiritual significance and made it more and more a private affair.

There are quite a few differences between animals and humans ... there's a reason why rape is a discusting crime among human societies, worse than Assault, and not in the animal Kingdom.

As for the second paragraph, I have a Christian view of human nature, i.e. Imagio Dei ... so we're definately going to not see eye to eye there, so I suppose we'd have to agree to dissagree.

Quote:
Ok, so in the first place, you need to define what you mean by alienation. Because alienation in Marx refers to the fact that the productive powers and products of of social labour appear to the producers as something external and alien to them, because they are owned and appropriated by capital.

I use it more broadly, social relationships in a Family are not alienated, you are part of the the Family (at least many families) and the work you do in that relationship is Your own, and directly relational; in the market Place Your work is alienated, it isn't Yours, it's value has nothing to do With you, and its distribution has nothing to do With you.

a home cooked meal and a meal sold in a restaurant are fundamentally different, in the former it matters who makes the meal who eats the meal and the result is a relationship, the latter by definition throws all those Things out and the relationship is over once the transaction is over.

Sex in a relationship has a different Logic than sex that a trick has With a prostitute, in the latter scenario sex is an alienated commodity.