viscousmemories

What kind of stupid question is that, exactly? Do you think before you speak? Did I suggest, anywhere in my post, that I condone what happened to me? The point is that you think sex is wrong and dirty, and because you are a christian, you employ some very base and ridiculous tactics to try to lure others into agreeing with your nonsensical views. Because I have some experience in these matters, let me help to illuminate these tactics for you:

First, you talk in a gentle, unassuming monotone, in spite of the fact that you passionately oppose the views many particpants here have expressed. This is a common tactic among people of your type. The idea being, you can fool us into thinking your just trying to see things from our point of view, and don't mean any offense. Horseshit. You would forcibly remove every last one of us from the Earth if it would further your cause. You know this, I know this. Grow up and admit it.

Second, you talk way too much. Take it from someone who knows. I have the same problem. Thing is, I try really hard to inject some substance into my lengthy posts. That way, people don't want to slam their head into a wall repeatedly as they read my words. Your words, however, inspire just that desire. As I read through this entire thread last night, I found myself almost unable to read through some of your comments. You know why? Because you go out of your way to make every little statement so verbose and convoluted that it's virtually impossible for anyone to keep focused on the fact that, really, you are making no point at all.

Third, on those rare occasions when you finally do make a "point", it is usually just a rehashing of your earlier moral condemnation of people who don't, as you, believe that sex is dirty and wrong and evil.

Fourth, you try to recreate the English language to fit your twisted and juvenile perceptions of reality. Your psyche, my friend, is NOT your soul. That's why my beloved dictionary has TWO SEPARATE entries. One that has the heading, "Psyche", and one that has the heading "Soul". These two words are not interchangeable, and they mean quite different things.

Need any clarifications?

tronvillain

luvluv:
Well, my mother is happily married to my father in a monogamous relationship and is fifty-six, so I don't really see a porn ahead for her. Still, if she wanted to do it I wouldn't have a probem with it. I do not have a sister, but the same goes for all of the other women I care about - I simply do not consider being a porn start to be a terrible thing. Get it?

dangin

luvluv, haven't you noticed all the people telling you their personal experiences in the industry and that they know several well adjusted person's who have been talent in these films? Loosen up the blinders a bit there, shall we?

Sure people get used, but that happens everywhere, you make it sound like the only people in the pornography industry are helpless girls who got molested by daddy.

As to the alleged love of jesus and his followers.

My best friend is married to a woman who was molested as a child. Her devout christian parents would not talk about it with her, did not get her therapy, and told her to pretend it never happened. She has been mentally twisted by this far more than acting in a porno would ever achieve. She was so shy in college that she would not speak, if she had something to say she would whisper it in the ear of one trusted friend and have them speak for her. Of course all this changed after her third beer at each party where she became the life of the party and would fuck any guy who smiled at her. Which is how my friend got to know her, and how she got date raped and impregnated after they were engaged.

And of course my own first wife, raised in a home so conservative it might as well have been 1952. She was caught playing doctor with the neighbor boy when they were 13. The boy was imediately shipped to his grandparents for the summer, but she was left behind with the whispers, and the stares, and the headshaking. Her own ability to express herself sexually was injured by this and led to our divorce because she and I had major sexual compatibility issues. We are still friends, and I believe she has finally, at the age of 33, overcome most of the shit poured into her by her repressed mother and now has a healthy and enjoyable sex life. I hope so anyway, because I do wish for her happiness.

These are simply examples of what I said above. Sexual expression is our natural state. The christian repression of this is unnatural and it is a sick masquarade that the christian standards of sexual behaviour are now seen as what is normal in the United States.

luvluv

visciousmemories:

I don't think that sex is dirty. Where we would differ, I suppose, is that I believe sex CAN be dirty. If I coerce someone with low self-esteem into sex through playing on their insecurities or through exploiting their financial needs, if I coerce and pressure them into going past their personal boundaries, and if I do this while only interested in my own gratification with total disregard to whether or not the other party is enjoying the experience, then yes I would consider that dirty. Wouldn't you?

(I wouldn't blame the person who was coerced, and I would try to help them to see that the whole situation was not their fault. I would try to help them to see they were taken advantage of.)

However if the sex occurs between two committed partners who truly care for each other and with mutual respect for each others desires, I think sex is beautiful EVEN IF THE PARTICIPANTS AREN'T MARRIED. (I think it would be even better, all things considered, if they were married, but no less beautiful nonetheless).

I have a problem with porn, not sex.

I probably haven't represented myself well in this thread, but I would not want to remove any of you from the Earth. I'd like to help you, so far as I am able. But I can't do that by lying to you or not challenging some of the lies that you already believe. I certainly do mean offense to the notion that porn is an acceptable and healthy expression of human sexuality. I don't mean any offense to the person who holds this belief. I want to challenge that belief.

I know. I realize I do it I'm just too lazy (and in too much of a hurry) to edit myself.

That's a ridiculous strawman. How many times do you want me to say it? Sex is not evil. It is beautiful. It is the highest form of expression of intimacy and trust to which the human form can be committed. It's also a lot of fun. I think anyway two people consent to express themselves within the bedroom, and I mean ANYway, so long as it is consistent with the love they have for each other is TOTALLY GREAT. Really.

However, this is not what porn in reality is. Porn in reality is exploitative. And I therefore do not support it. That's it.

I did not mean to demean your experience. In all honesty, your intent to me in that post wasn't clear. You made a statement that you were furious at your parents for calling the police on the man, and nowhere in the post did you say that this was just a function of your youth. It seemed like you were blaming your parents for doing something any parent would have done. I didn't get that your intent was to try to assess the role the judgement of others had in making you feel bad about yourself for the incident. The only proper thing to do in such a situation is to help a person back to emotional healthy by giving them all the care they can to do so. However, in a perfectly sexually healthy society, calling the police on such a person and trying ones best to get him off the street would still absolutely be the best thing to do. In such a world everyone can see how sick such a man was and would have appreciated that you were the victim, not the perpetrator.

tronvillain

luvluv:
It is simply not clear that this is what is going on in porn.

luvluv

dangin:

And your point is what? The Christian parents should have gotten her counseling, even according to Biblical ethics. No experienced pastor in the country would tell the girl not get some form of counseling if she needed it. What does that have to do with Christianity proper? One of my pastors, a woman, does sexual abuse counseling at the local hospital, during which she shares her own experiences about being abused. My favorite preachers, a woman named Joyce Meyer, is very vocal about being abused as a child and advocates for Christian parents to be more upfront about challenging the phenomenon. I don't know what that example is supposed to prove, besides the fact that being a Christian does not make you a perfect parent. I could have told you that.

FOR. GOODNESS. SAKE. I never said sexual expression wasn't natural. I never argued for repression. I even said that I did not even consider premarital sex to be necessarily a sinful thing, between committed partners (I might be wrong about that, but that is my subjective belief. I at least don't think it is as wrong as others in the church do). I do not think sex is dirty, I think many aspects of the porn industry are dirty.

What on earth do I have to do or say to get you people to accept that fact and focus on the issue?

tronvillian:

Okay, so I'll ask you the question. If you saw the Belladona program, and saw what participating in porn did to her, would you fell morally justified in masterbating to her image?

I'll read everybody's responses, and perhaps make a final summation of my position if necessary, but I think we have reached a point of diminishing returns here, so I'll start to make my exit. I hope no one was unnecessarily offended, but I hope everyone's views were challenged.

christ-on-a-stick

Ooooh... the heart of the matter (wish we had a pulsating heart gif here...)
Yes, that scenario is lovely. But how about 2 horny people who mutually consent to fuck like bunnies 'til the cows come home and then maybe or maybe not ever see each other again?
Or two women getting it on? Or two men? Or two women and a man or two men and a woman? All of age and fully consenting parties, acting responsibly and respect for the others' boundaries, and just fulfilling each others' carnal desires without being in "love" or committed?

No exploitation. No coercion. Just a rockin' good time had by all.

Now if you don't think that sex is dirty/evil/wrong, but believe the above scenarios to be anything less than "ok", please explain WHY and maybe we can go from there.

My prediction: it has something to do with God...

tronvillain

luvluv:
I did not see the program, but I would probably have no problem with jacking off to one of her movies.

Silent Acorns

All that you have pointed out, luvluv, is that porn CAN be exploitive and SOMETIMES is exploitive. In order to make your case you have to show that exploitation is common and severe enough that the whole industry can be labeled "exploitive". You have already admitted that your extrapolation of the case of Belladonna to the whole industry is based on your subjective opinion about the industry as a whole.

Again, I think you have a workable position with the "ethics of exploitation" angle, but you have to develop it by doing some research to find out just how prevelent this exploitation is.

Just saying, "I think it's rampant" isn't going to work with anyone but the converted.

luvluv

coas:

Well, the two men and two women part, so long as all the love and committment and stuff apply, are fine by me personally. I'm not going to get into issues of people's sexual preferences.

With all the other scenarios, yes I would object to them because, in my view, it is wrong to use people as means to an end, even if they consent to be so used. Further, I do not think that casual sex has anything approaching a good success rate for producing lasting happiness. It can lead to awkward, embarassing situations that most of us end up wishing we had never gotten ourselves into. The prolonged practice can set up sexual habits and appetites (particularly in men) which can never possibly be satisfied within the confines of a committed relationship. Generally speaking, it does not end up in the neat and mutually productive fashion in the manner in which you have laid it out. If you have casual sex long enough, with enough people, you are going to create some problems. Given that these same desires can be satisifed within the confines of a committed relationship, I definitely see commitment as the moral, social, emotional, physcial superior alternative.

Fundamentally, though, I think it is always wrong to use people as a means to an end. I think it is always a mistake to isolate your emotional self from what you do with your body (which I would wager is one of the main reasons that many of you feel depressed or shame with your sexual experiences, however eager you may be to blame this on Christianity). It is naive to think that you can commit your body to it's most intimate expression without that having an affect on your emotional state.

Lets be clear. Sexual desires will have to be controlled by one value system or another. So we aren't talking about "Christianity" vs "Unrestrained Sexuality". We are talking about "Christian restraint" vs "Other Methods of restraint." I assume most of you wouldn't consider it repression to not sleep with your best friends wife, even if she consented. You would call it self control. Well, I would apply the same thing in reverse. I think even if there wasn't a God (There is, by the way) that sex would still be the highest expression to which two human beings could commit themselves, and I would still be against cheapening it by doing it with strangers for fun.

It is not that I hold sex in too low a regard which makes me disagree with you folks most of the time, it is perhaps that I hold it in too high a regard relative to your standards. You seem to think it is essential (in that we must never be restrained from it) and yet trivial (in that it is no different from any other physical activity). I think it is non-essential (in that it is perfectly fine to restrict yourself from it on the basis of any number of principles which you deem to be more important than sex) and non-trivial (in that I think that when you do engage in it, it should be meaningful). Both positions are essentially somewhat contradcitory, but mine, of course, are better .