'Have you paid for pornography?' poll discussion

flowerfairy159

MSE_Martin wrote: »

A huge number of peopel voted, more than a normal poll, and it shows 2/3s of people use/read !!!!!! of which 15% pay for it at some point.

Therefore that suggests that yes something does need to be brought up. Whether it is agreed with or not.

Would like to make 1 really big comment here though:

For all of those who say "No its Gross" or "No !!!!!! is only what the piond scum use" please think about those that do it. I'm sure you may think oh no my husband/father/son/brother/mother/daughter/sister/wife etc wouldn't use that but fact is they do (Human behaviour study I conducted in thesis for Uni).

This is a Fact and has been proven many times. I have read countless story's on the Fabcebook link about people who have had their credit cards stolen/cloned and have had these charges on them but have been to scared to phone up and cancel/complain because people who are very "What you are doing is disgusting and perverted" make them feel its their fault.

Lets just say that yes I approve or the type of pron that doesnt hurt people, that is healthy (ie not child/animal/rape etc) and is used in the manner it was intended for and by the people it was intended for (over18).

So before you start preaching and forcing your opinions on others think about who you know that could be using it. If your preaching so much then its likely you dont even know cos they're too scared to tell you.

Ok loooong point and rant over lol x

bitemebankers

flowerfairy159 wrote: »

MSE_Martin wrote: »

So before you start preaching and forcing your opinions on others think about who you know that could be using it. If your preaching so much then its likely you dont even know cos they're too scared to tell you.

Well said.

What amazed me is the number of people who lied in this anonymous survey. Approximately 13% of men who responded claimed they don't use pr0n at all. We know from various national and international surveys that in the West, the actual figure is somewhat less than 1%. So, at least 10% must be lying.

I think this really illustrates the level of denial that exists. Or perhaps MSE users really *far* more prudish than average...? I doubt it, frankly.

fluffytrollop

geri1965 wrote: »

I have watched and read !!!!!! many years ago which I didn't pay for.

I am opposed to commerically produced !!!!!! now so I wouldn't watch it or read it, let alone pay for it.

I did buy a dirty book by Nancy Friday though.

Haha!! wasnt women on top was it? I read that...bloody funny stuff in places!:rotfl:

mippy

Stephenbw wrote: »

I have been a vegetarian for 26 years; I have used pornography for even longer. As the !!!!!! I am interested in involves only men I was curious to see how this harmed women or children so I checked out your link.

This was what I found

Q: How about gay and lesbian pornography? Are feminists against those genres too?
A: Feminists are against all forms of pornography because, sadly, the vast majority of commercial gay male pornography mimics the domination/subordination dynamic of straight !!!!!!.
.

There's no such thing as 'feminists' - there are many different types of feminism just as there are many different types of conservative. Some feminists are very much in favour of !!!!!! made by and for women, or !!!!!! made by the stars who have control and consent in what they do. A friend of a friend is a professional dominatrix and hugely enjoys her work - there is a big difference between professional sex workers who do it because they enjoy it, and men and women coerced into it through circumstances or exploitation.

Personally I don't use image !!!!!! because a huge amount of it is pretty tacky, the copy in many of the !!!!!! mags I've seen is enormously misogynistic which is a real turn off, it doesn't float my boat (I'm not into mainstream 'heartthrobs') or is more geared toward getting men off than women. Incidentally, Suicide Girls are in some ways as 'exploitative' as other sites (http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2005/09/69006) but I appreciate the initial recognition that not all men or women want Sam Fox/Pam Anderson types.

There's nothing 'prudish' about not liking !!!!!!. I'm happy for !!!!!! to exist when it's !!!!!! that doesn't harm those using or making it. As a feminist, though, I DO object to women in lingerie being used to sell *everything* on the assumption that a) women are purely decorative b) the manufacturer's assumption that only men could possibly be interested. It's dated and boring.

Fridgemonkey

What is the problem with nudity and sex? Why is this called pornography and hidden away? It is easier to see gratuitous violence including mutilation and decapitation both real and imaginary (this is pornography) than to see nudity and sex which is often described as “dirty” or “filthy” especially in British circles. I agree there is some abuse eg. forced prostitution and under-age etc, but I’m sure that our failure to be up front and honest about sex encourages an immature and shameful approach to something that should be valued and celebrated. It is part of our humanity and will not go away unless you want humanity to go away!

bettyboo71

xmen2 wrote: »

on the phone you can tell whether somebody isn't enjoying talking about it by the sound of their voice.

And I suspect most of the time you can tell when they are REALLY enjoying it - but I'm afraid to say that its probaby my ability to fake it well that kept my 'regulars' happy for seven years! As for the 35p lines - if you're using anything else its a con - the advertising is designed to make you think you're getting something a bit better/naughtier on the dearer lines but if you test this you'll find its exactly the same girls on all the services. Thats my money saving tip LOL

On the subject of !!!!!!, I use it, have paid for it, have shared it with partners and, like so many others on here believe that less criminalisation and more regulation is the way forward. And discussions like this are good because they make people less afraid to raise it as an issue in any context.

If we had a more honest, open and realistic approach to sex generally in this country then we'd probably have less problems with underage pregnancy etc - thats what the statistics from other (more open) countries suggest.

Maat

I don’t have time to deal with all the arguments on here – or indeed to read them all – but I’ll go with a few and maybe they’ll cover all the bases.

Firstly the stupid comment about animals being made of meat. So are humans, so you gonna eat grandma when she dies? Or your dog? Or your cat?

Just because pornography is so prevalent isn’t an excuse for continuing it. So was the enslavement of black people a couple of hundred years ago but some people managed to think beyond the cultural norms and discover that slavery was wrong – and eventually they won. To enslave someone now is considered totally wrong – unless it’s a woman who’s prostituted into one of the so called ‘sex industries’ obviously.

Just because women have to smile on these stupid films and claim they’re enjoying the often painful things that are happening to them doesn’t actually mean that it’s so. There may be some women who actually like doing this stuff – all I can say is that the women I’ve known who’ve done it have been deeply traumatised.

As for the Eastern European women and women from other poorer countries – have you never heard of trafficking? It’s not just women from other countries who are trafficked either. An English friend of mine was trafficked across the UK to separate her from her family and friends who may have been able to help her out of the ‘industry’.

Adult pornography is used by !!!!!philes to groom children into believing that what’s being done to them is natural and normal. And the pornographers depend on !!!!!philes educating children that their sole worth is in being abused to provide them with the fodder they need for filming, thus providing them with obscene profits – very little of which actually filters down to the women and girls involved.

The freedom of speech argument is always brought forward about these things, but why should someone’s freedom of speech infringe on another person’s freedom from harm? The average age of girls entering the sex industries is 13. What kind of freedom of choice does a 13 year old get about being in these movies? And what kind of choice is it once she hits 18 but has been doing this for so long she doesn’t know any other kind of life and believes abuse, rape, beatings and pain are all that she’ll ever experience? Pornography and the other sex industries are the one line of 'work' where it's a positive asset to have been abused as a child.

Women in the sex industries (rape industries more like) say that they’re happy and willing participants – what else can they say? To say otherwise is to invite more beatings and rape from the men who control them. And to say otherwise is to admit to themselves the hell they’re enduring. It takes intense courage to admit that you haven’t chosen even something so nightmarish as pornography.

Pornography is gradually being recognised (along with other forms of prostitution) as an act of violence against women. PTSD is a bigger problem for exited sex workers than it is for soldiers who’ve been in battle. Why would this be if they were happy in their ‘work’?

Pornography isn’t about sex – not really – it’s about oppression, and yes of course young women and girls want to be like the idols that our culture puts in front of them. How often do you see a great woman scientist in the media? They exist, but they don’t meet the cultural norm of ‘women are solely for looking at and for men to obtain sexual gratification on and in’. So of course this is what girls aspire too – it’s pretty much all they’re given. When over half of teenage girls want to have surgery – be cut open – to fit society’s ‘norms’ and when children as young as seven years old hate their own bodies we’ve really got something wrong. Our society has been pornified to death and we all – women, men, and children of both sexes – suffer because of it.

As for legalising it, Germany tried that one and the illegal trade with all the gang troubles and crime increased accordingly. It didn't protect even one woman, it merely made it easier for the criminals.

One final point - pornography and sex are two seperate and distinct things. Sex for money is not consensual, neither is sex through threats or intimidation. Do you know what goes on behind the camera? The only valid reason for sex is that it's fun (ok for love too if you wanna be romantic about it) and the 'sex industries' are only fun if you're the one paying for and/or viewing them. To the people in them it's nothing more than abuse and rape for cash (assuming you're actually paid).

I’m gonna give some more links for people to check out for themselves if they want to find out the truth, and then I’m leaving the discussion. I have a career to plan.

http://rmott62.wordpress.com/ - if you read nothing else please read this one. Rebecca was trafficked across the UK into prostitution and pornography. She's an amazing woman who helps other women and girls who've been pushed into the sex industries. I've never known anyone else who's so eloquent about what she endured and I have no idea how she survived - all I know is that she did and that she still suffers terribly because of it. If you're going to comment on her blog please keep it respectful.
http://tacklingdemand.blogspot.com/
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article6999874.ece
http://humantrafficking.change.org/blog/view/70_rise_in_german_sex_trafficking_due_to_legal_prostitution
http://www.examiner.com/human-rights-in-national/german-s-legalized-prostitution-brought-more-exploitation-than-emancipation-to-women
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vADSTum1000 - hear it from someone who's been there if you won't believe me
http://www.shelleylubben.com/ex-!!!!!!-star-neesa-story - and more exited women who are finally getting to tell their story (please forgive the pink background)

fluffytrollop

well said Maat.

Gareth_Lazelle

Maat,

Not an expert, but some thoughts to ponder:

Don't you think your arguments could easily be used to argue for better regulation and oversight? And perhaps also suggest that driving it further underground will make it worse for those involved, and not better.

(If it is criminalsied even more, it really will only be the criminal gangs that produce this stuff - and while we can shut them down when we find them, it might be easier to make the industry unprofitable for criminals, and shut them down that way)?

After all, just because some (perhaps even a lot, though I couldn't back that up with figures one way or the other) !!!!!! is manufactured by criminals and abusers doesn't mean that it all is (should you create laws and ban industries based upon what a portion of those involved are doing (should be ban the tobacco trade because of its association with the slave trade? (there are other reasons to ban it - but you get my point)), when there are other approaches?),

Additionally, are you overgeneralising based upon those involved that you have met - I would suspect that is a small subset of the trade at best, and given your leanings, might tend towards only speaking to those who are involved in the criminal end of the industry which might perhaps be skewing your viewpoint (not that their stories aren't tragic, disturbing, and deeply moving, but is it better to excise the problem rather than simply a blanket ban on the industry?)

Consider how this might apply to other industries (no more cockles if we ban that trade because of those shipped in from eastern europe to harvest them from Blackpool beach perhaps? - Indeed, a lot of farming might have to be banned... Or would regulation and oversight work better?),

John_Pierpoint

jsward60 wrote: »

Now that's what I call a good friend! :rotfl:
I think you may have dropped an 'f' there...or I may be being hugely presumptuous.

Perhaps there is a the missing in the sentence "....B]the[/B DVDs of a friend".

The word pornography has been created from pornē + graphein ancient Greek for prostitute and a word originally meaning write, but obviously the root of the English word graphic.
pornē itself was derived from a word meaning to sell or trade.

So I think we can generalise pornography into an activity that freeborn people do because they get paid for it.
I suppose many of us have to do things for money, that we would not normally do for entertainment.

So the more the individuals involved are performing sex just for the money the more exploitive and more pornographic (and taxable;)) the activity.

Attitudes to mixing money with sex vary by age and gender; and with many things in life the "innocent" are likely to be "exploited" by the more experienced.

Is a junior hospital doctor working long hours exploited or just ambitious?

Is a talented footballer of little brain, exploited of just lucky if he has a glamorous WAG at his side?