christ-on-a-stick

Thanks Harumi

Another thing I wanted to expound upon:

tronvillain wrote: This is a very important point, not to be disregarded.

As an analogy, I am very happy to have a physical brain, from whence comes my consciousness, intellect, and personality. I would call it "valuable" and a "gift" (euphemistically as we already discussed). I am glad that I can use this valuable tool to read, write, converse with others and try as best I can to apply reason in dealing with this strange world and a sometimes seemingly absurd existence (a' la Camus).

But guess what? Sometimes I use it to be totally silly and laugh at low-brow humor. Sometimes I (try to) switch it off completely via meditation. Sometimes I drink al-kee-hol or ocasionally ingest recreational substances and see things in a different way for a while. Why, just last night I used to it watch Joe Millionaire !!! groans heard all 'round) Talk about meaningless...

And here's the kicker (as it pertains to this wandering and convoluted discussion vis-a-vis porn.) Five days a week, 8 hours a day, I RENT out my brain!!! That's right, I spend my workdays using my brain to do tasks for somebody else that I don't particularly enjoy and I do it for money!!! Sometimes I even like it, but sometimes it's really just *work*... but at the end of the day, when I go home and my brain is once again mine all mine, whether I particularly enjoyed it or not I don't feel "violated", deceived or having otherwise "lost" something. I gave of my time and mental energy and I got paid. In porn, I give of my time and physical (and mental) energy and I get paid. Lucky for me, I usually have fun too.

My advice to *any* woman in the biz that was finding it detrimental to their mental/emotional wellbeing would be "Quit. You are a valuable person and if doing this is not making you happy *or is making you feel bad* then it's not worth it, and you deserve better for yourself".

I have known a few women who have done just that - quit after a while because it wasn't what they wanted to do anymore. They were independent and generally emotionally healthy women who were strong enough to make that choice. I think the key is to start way back with adolescent (and younger) girls in preparing them to be that strong and independent. IMO, one of the biggest obstacles to doing that is the prude, hypocrititical, sex-negative and degrading Judeo-Christian "values" that permeate our (U.S) culture.

Viti

Thank you, I had been trying to say this earlier but just couldn't get it across. Good job!

Michaelson

Nice posts, COAS!

One thing, though. in regards to this I agree wholeheartedly. But luvluv's original point, or at least one of luvluv's points, was that given the documented cases of coercion and exploitation, can it be moral to watch porn and simply turn a blind eye to the possibility that the actors you're watching are being abused.

That's what I always thought was the interesting question. As I've said, I don't look at porn on the net because of it. But apart from those who have said that they have no problem ogling a girl who has to take drugs to deal with the depression caused by the porn that she was coerced into starring in (which I personally find to be a ludicrous position), no one has really confronted the question.

You have written in the past that you thought watching girls on tape who are being abused is abhorent (at least I'm pretty sure you have), so how do you justify looking at pornography when (by your own statistics) there's a good chance that that is exactly what is happening?

christ-on-a-stick

Hi Michaelson & thanks!

Sorry, I didn't mean to evade that particular point of luvluv's (sometimes some things get lost in the shuffle!) You wrote: You recall correctly in that I would find watching girls on tape who are being abused (or with knowledge of their abuse/coercion) personally abhorrent. I would also find someone else being turned on by this to be offensive to my personal sensibilities (i.e., "icky"), but if I may be totally honest, I don't know if I would call it completely immoral in an objective sense. I openly admit my definiciency in arguing principles of objective vs. subjective morality, which is why I am very interested in what others have to say on that particular point. I simply don't want to make a definitive statement without being able to "defend" my point of view. Does that make any sense?

However..... to focus on this part I'll have to re-read what I wrote but I don't think that I said there is a "good" chance of this being the case. I think there is a CHANCE because I know that there are some women like this in the industry, although to reiterate I do not believe it to be a majority or even "a lot" (gawd, I hate these vague terms... wish we all had some hard #s to work with!)

Toss into the mix the ambiguities of some types of film that make it *seem* as the though a girl is being roughed up, etc., when much of the time it is acting/roleplaying and it gets even more confusing.

I guess basically I would say that barring a scene in which it is clear that a girl is being unwillingly abused, or the viewer having personal knowledge that the girl is being coerced etc., , I don't find it reasonable to label the viewing of porn as immoral on the *chance* that this might be the case, anymore than it is immoral to go to a regular movie on the *chance* that one of the actors is having a nervous breakdown/is on drugs/is being coerced by her abusive agent to maintain a hectic film schedule... etc., etc.

I would like to add that *if* a concrete case would be made that the majority (or even CLOSE to a majority) of women in porn were in that situation (coercion/abuse) or were suffering horrible emotional damage, I would be more than willing to take another look at that argument. The thing is, in this situation, luvluv is the one making the "positive claim" (that most or many women in porn are in that category). Without real *evidence* of that, and adding to the mix my personal experience that points to the opposite conclusion, I fail to accept his positive claim.

Michaelson

Okay, I'd like to draw a distinction straight away between what is occuring on-screen and what isn't. When I talk about girls being abused, I don't necessarily mean being slapped around on screen, or necessarily even off screen, I am refering to them giving up their sexuality and body against their will. I have no problem with role-playing and so on, that's not my qualm.

As for numbers... no, I still don't have any, but when you say "I DO NOT believe that this represents the majority or even a large percentage (say a quarter)," I think of that as a HUGE percentage. if only 5 per cent of girls are in this situation, you are talking about one girl every few times you watch a porno (assuming they mostly have a few girls in them) that you are getting off looking at a girl who has been made against her will to give up her body. And the reason she's been made to give up her body, is because the person who made her do it is banking on people like you watching it (not actually you. You know what I mean.) That's just my opinion, of course. As for your approach of standing back on this issue, I think you're playing the right card on that one. It's a good idea to think through statements, and whether you can substantiate them before clicking the submit button, I just found out on another thread.

Having said that... I do agree with luvluv that there is a big difference between someone being coerced into film acting and someone being coerced into porn. Just like there's a big difference between assault and aggrevated sexual assault. To me, watching someone who has been pressured into renting out their own sexuality crosses a line that watching someone who has been pressured into fulfilling a hectic filming schedule in hollywood propper doesn't cross. On the question of morality, I'm with you, I don't know. But I am surprised that more people don't adopt my viewpoint, to be honest. I'd have thought it has natural appeal, but I guess I'm bound to think that, aren't I?

christ-on-a-stick

Hi Michaelson,

Point taken (on the distinction between what is happening onscreen and off), I will bear that in mind.

For the rest I only have a couple more comments (I eagerly await luvluv's reply, though!) that will have to wait until tomorrow unless I get more free time tonight.

Til then!

Lauri

Eleutheria

Christ-on-a-stick:

You’re amazing! And intelligent.

The peculiar character of the pornography is that it involves all things prohibited in any common workplace. Yet it still is a corporate business, there are employees and payroll. Is work ethics reduced in accordance to the erotic nature of labor? Oh, boy. I have many questions, both personally and impertinently. Forgive me.

1. When you were working, were you making love? Or were you fucking? I’m speaking of the deep layer of emotion expressed during the job. Did sexual intercourse confuse you – that is, have you fallen in love with one of the actors?

2. Did the job have a damaging effect? That is, did the job ever muddle your comprehension of love?

3. Did you ever become jealous – that is, in an orgy or gangbang, the guy stops having sex with you and moves to another girl? Or that he has longer sex with her than you? Is the job entirely impersonal?

4. What is your definition of love? Does it require fidelity?

5. Why have you stopped working for the industry?

6. If you’ve slept with countless men, does it follow that you like to sleep with countless men?

7. How did the job influence your lifestyle?

8. Did the job ruin sex? Or did it make you covet for more?

9. Is one of the advantages of the job is that it enables you to have more realistic (thus superior) erotic understanding?
Do you pity those who lack sexual experience or understanding? Or envy their ignorance?

10. Does the job enable you to realize the power of female sexuality? Or the reverse?

11. When you finished the job, did you say, “Well, as long it pays,” or “This is the best job in the world!”?

12. Did the job help you understand the religious aversion to pornography?

13. How did your boyfriend feel about your job? Never mind all the logical answers he might have given you, did you honestly feel that he was happy and content and proud of you?

14. Can true love consist of one person? Can you marry two guys and be happy?

christ-on-a-stick

Hi Eleutheria - Thanks and thanks!

While I don't mind your questions, I will keep my answers fairly brief as I don't want to derail the topic of this thread too much (as I eagerly await luvluv's response to my recent slew of comments. ) Also, a couple of your questions are not applicable to me since (you may have missed this as it was relatively early on in the thread) in the past 7 years I have only done girl-girl and fetish projects. I did have some mainstream (boy-girl) experiences way back when (10 years ago) but nothing along the lines of gangbang etc. So anyhoo:

#1: The latter. While I have certainly enjoyed the company of and been friendly with many of the girls, I have never "fallen in love" with someone through the course of work.
#2: Definitely not. The two ("work" and love") have always been very separate for me, which is not to say that work cannot be "fun", but it isn't love in any sense of the word.
#3: N/A (see above.)
#4: Part A - way to complicated for me to go into here. Part B - Not necessarily. I don't believe that monogamy is either a)naturally or b) divinely mandated, which is not to say that it cannot be a valid and healthy choice as well.
#5: I haven't (check out the 1st page of the thread as it seems you missed some salient info, no offense).
#6: Not at all. I still go to work (at my "day" job), hang out with my husband, family and friends, work out, clean the house, walk the dog and spend an inordinate amount of time on IIDB. The only sense in which it has "influenced my lifestyle" has been financially, in a positive way.
#7: N/A, again see above.
#8: Neither.
#9: I have learned a good deal about my body (and other womens') through some of the work which I see as a positive thing. I neither "pity" nor "envy" anyone else for their lack of experience but do believe sexuality to be a wonderful part of life that should be embraced and explored without guilt or shame (and practiced responsibly BTW).
#10: I AM WOMAN. HEAR ME ROAR. Definitely the former.
#11: Sometimes one, sometimes the other. Just like my "real" job.
#12: I already understood it. It's based on guilt, shame and a tremendous desire to keep women "in their place" as well (IMO).
#13: My husband loves and accepts me for who I am and was well aware of EVERYTHING I had done/was doing when we married and I am totally open and honest with him in regard to what I am doing when I work. That's really the extent to which I am comfortable discussing my personal relationship.
#14: I have no idea. No, really, I don't. I think it's possible (to be polyamorous, I've known a few couples that (seem to) be happy in that lifestyle). It's not something I give a lot of thought.

*You do know that 14 questions is the limit, right? I think it's in the Handbook somewhere. So there ya have it.

NOW.... yoohoo, luvluv , I'm waiting!!! I really want to wrap this discussion up so that I can get some work done

((I know, I know, other people actually have *lives*... but when you get a chance I look forward to your responses on my last few posts. Thanks!)

luvluv

Michealson:

When did I say that sex can only exist between two loving and committed partners? To be honest, I'm not even sure what post of mine these comments are referring to.

The point I was trying to make is that we all do hold sex to be important and valuable for SOME reason other than simply pleasure. If the value we (and women specifically, for this particular point) placed on sexuality was solely or even primarily on pleasure, then many of our reactions to certain sexual situations would make very little sense.

A person for whom the value of sex was pleasure would have less of a problem being tricked into sex than they would at having been tricked out of a hamburger. But of course that is ludicrous. Most people (women especially) would be more hurt at having been used for sex than at having been used for some triffling material thing. So the whole "the value of sex is pleasure" is a bit baffling to me, and it leaves an awful lot unexplained.

Lauri:

Well, again, that you think that about me doesn't surprise me a whole lot, because I've been nothing but pigeonholed and stereotyped for the duration of this conversation. You've already decided who I am and what I feel ahead of time simply from knowing that I am a Christian. I do understand that people can enjoy non-committal sex. People enjoy smoking. That doesn't mean that it is good for them or that it is the best decision they can make with their lives. I can disagree with something that people enjoy. I can even say so, and give reasons for it.

And, yet again, the fact that you think this is simply fascinating and illuminating information about you personally, but it has nothing to do with the conversation. I should start a fan club, what with all the interest in my bio around here.

FANTASTIC! This is all I've been saying. I'm glad you said that because I honestly don't think some people get the distinction. Many people honestly believe that if you speak up against one manifestation of sex (like pornography) that you are 100% anti-sex. (Especially if you are a Christian).

We agree, then, that SOME expressions of sexuality can be shall we say degrading, even between consensual partners. (Infidelity, for example). The disagreement then would be exactly what kind of sexual expressions would not be "precious."

THAT was your longest post ever?! You lightweight... You've got a long way to go before you are the most boring poster around here.

a) My point was that many young women who make very questionable decisions about their sexuality already have a sense of ownership over their bodies.

b) Actually, I do have the right to tell you that you shouldn't be using your own body for pleasure, even if you are comfortable doing so, and for profit. You, furthermore, have the right to tell me where I can stick my advice. I can point this right out to you in the Constitution if you want.

I don't think you meant what you typed in that statement. Do you mean I have no moral right to state my opinion? And by what process did you arrive at that conclusion.

c) "It's my body" is a non-sequitor in any moral argument regarding the use of the body UNLESS the person involved would like to coerce (physically) someone into some activity they do not want to do. My point was, firstly, that many young women are able to state their ownership of their body to authority figures at least. But this response has nothing to do with the question at hand. If someone says "smoking is bad for you." The response "It's my body" is a non-sequitor.

Secondly, these same young women who are able to comprehend that they own their bodies STILL make decisions that they regret about their bodies because they do not consider their bodies (or the pleasure they derive from them) to be worth as much as something they can get in exchange for their bodies ("love", money, acceptance, etc). Therefore, it seems to me that a sense of ownership ALONE is insufficient unless it is understood the sexuality that they own is valuable. And the notion that their sexuality is valuable because it is pleasurable seems to me, with all due respect, to be a woefully insufficient deterrent to bad decision-making.

Say a 16 year old girl wants to have sex with a prospective boyfriend because she is afraid that if she doesn't she will lose him to another girl. She doesn't really have any indication that the boy really has any feelings for her but she feels she can win him over by sleeping with him. The girl is also very physically attracted to the boy and will likely enjoy sleeping with him. Now, let's also say that we happen to have gained inside knowledge from a locker room conversation that the boy only wants to stick around with this young women long enough to have sex with her, and then he is going to dump her. How will this girl avoid making a bad decision based on the notion that her sexuality is valuable because it is pleasurable to her? She will probably enjoy the sex, but that isn't primarily what she is having it for.

Nice try there, missy. We were talking about how a sense of ownership could help young women make better decisions about how to use their sexuality. In my opinion you still haven't made a clear statement on how this would apply to a given situation and enable a young woman to make a better decision. In case you haven't guessed yet, I'm calling you out on purpose on this issue because I think this "ownership of the body" stuff is just a contentless statement that people make about their own reckless behavior, be it bungee-jumping or heroin or promiscuity.

The car analogy was meant to convey that, as I said before, a claim of ownership in a moral conversation about the uses of what you claim to own is a non-sequitor.

Let's get a few things straight, here. Contrary to what Michealson may think (he made the statement a few posts ago that I didn't know a lot about pornography) I happen to be very well-versed with the CONSUMPTION end of pornography. As I said before, I was basically addicted to pornography (I'm talking quite often twice a day) for about 10 years. Do you realize how many abused women I'd have watched in that amount of time if even 1 percent of them were abused? Given that I'd watch probably a half an hour to an hour's worth of porn per sitting (adding up, probably, to 5-10 different girls a day) I'd be guaranteed statistically have seen HUNDREDS of such girls over that ten year period. And with the internet, the odds are even greater. My point is based on the amount of porn that men generally consume. If a person has a daily porn habit, and they recycle through movies at a decent pace (either through rentals, pay per view, or the internet) and they WILL see hundreds of abused women in the course of their porn viewing career even if the percentage of abused women were under 5%. 5% of 1000 women is a substantial number of women, and given the advent of the internet, a man with a daily porn habit and decent bandwith can easily see a thousand different women in a year or two.

The essence of my argument is that even if the percentage of women who are abused is low, the volume of porn consumed nearly guarantees that some of the women a porn consumer sees will be victims of abuse.

I'm sorry, but there is a difference. And a very big difference.

If I walked up to ANYONE IN THIS DISCUSSION tommorow, and offered them 50 bucks to take 15 minutes to help me out with a logic puzzle, TO A PERSON you would probably all do it.

If I walked up to ANYONE IN THIS DISCUSSION tommorow, and offered them 50 bucks to take 15 minutes to have sex with me, to a person you would probably say no.

So if renting out one's brain is absolutely no different from renting out your body, why would most of you help me with the logic puzzle and yet decline to sleep with me (even on principle, even if you were guaranteed that you would enjoy it)?

Again, I plead guilty to having the idea that when it comes to sex people nowadays tend to trot out terrible arguments and even worse analogies, which their own behavior and opinions disagrees with, and they do all this primarily because the people they are discussing sex with let them get away with it. As far as it is within my feeble intellectual powers, I'm not going to do that.

For instance:

How, exactly, do Judeo-Christian "values" keep girls from being strong and independent vis a vis their sexuality? Particularly when many of these girls (particularly in my case) do not belong to families with anything more than ceremonial ties to any religious tradition.

I never said it was completely immoral in an objective sense!

I simply asked for a justification for it's morality from those who do consider it moral. I don't believe I've seen one yet. (A few people said that they would still view Belladonna, but no one said WHY this was a morally appropriate decision.)

I never said most women, I believe the strongest I got was a "substantial minority" of women (and men) in porn. What would constitute evidence of that minority's existence? You know many psychologists would conclude that the promiscuity alone would be sufficient grounds to suspect that many of them were emotionally unhealthy. Beyond that, the point was that a) one could not be sure that the person you were watching was not one of these abused women and that b) statistically you are basically guaranteed to have seen some of these abused women over a lifetime (say, 20 years) of porn watching.

christ-on-a-stick

luvluv, luvluv, luvluv..... YOU ARE EXHAUSTING ME!!!!

It's like de'ja vu all over again....

Okely dokely. This will probably be my last opportunity to respond in great length to this topic 'til after my vacation, so I'll try to cover everything I can think of and if you have further comments I can address them when I get back. Alternately, if you choose to let this thread die a natural death before we both die of old age that's cool too. We can always start over with another topic... how about is masturbation a sin??? (hehe... sorry, couldn't help myself...)

Allrighty then.
luvluv, I'm sorry if you feel that I have tried to pigeonhole or stereotype you during this discussion, as that has not been my intention. However, I don't see that is is unreasonable for me to make certain assumptions about your beliefs based on your self-identified belief system Yes, I get it. You disagree with it, you think it's bad for them, but as far as giving reasons... those reasons have still consisted solely of assertions , without any accompanying evidence other than personal anecdotes. (And just in case you're going to point out that my opinions on the porn industry are based in large part by my personal experiences, please bear in mind that YOU are the one making the "positive" claim here and have yet to provide evidence for it.) HOLD THE PRESSES... luvluv and I agree on something!!!! Yes, I believe that *some* expressions of sexuality can be degrading (although I would not agree with your example of infidelity). HOWEVER, please note that I do NOT agree with "not precious = degrading" (if indeed that is your view). Even my beginner's mind recognizes that as a false dichotomy. I meant "you have no right" in a euphemistic sense. Yes, of course you personally have the right of free speech.... I didn't literally mean *you* but "society as a whole". And I don't believe that that group, even if it were to be a majority, has an ethical right to attempt to restrain me - legally or otherwise from using my own body for fun and profit as I see fit. I worded my sentiment poorly, hope that clarifies it.

Hey, I lied! (that's what you get for arguing with an Evil Atheist (TM)! hehe...) I will have to finish this later, either tomorrow or sometime during my vacation. I have run outta time! Feel free to comment on my responses here though, that might actually help "break it up" a little (or just confuse me? who knows...)

That's it for now. Hands. Tired. You're right, I am a lightweight.