( hard topic to categorize) Now I enjoy adult porn. I occasionally read about the social and personal ill porn induces, either through the 'objectification' of its subjects ( usually female) to an increased risk of criminal conduct ( rape, prostitution, molestation etc), to the exploitation of the workforce/ actors, to a predisposition to addiction and sexual dysfunction, or an inability to sustain personal relationships, to a breeding ground for organized crime. Do you believe that adult porn is harmful either to society, to its subjects or to women in general or is all of this just prudish nonsense used to promote old stereotypes unsupported by clinical data? Who is harmed by my nude guy sites on the internet, or your 'Judy and Jennie love Gymnastics' download? Is pornography really a vice or just a misunderstood pleasure?
There certainly is an ugly side to porn. The move Lovelace highlights this by showing the glamor for public consumption during the first half of the movie, then the 2nd half showed what was really happening behind the scenes. There are a number of good documentaries on the dark side or porn too. With that said I do not think all porn is bad as I have seen documentaries and interviews with those in the industry that take a more ethical approach in production. Whether one supports or opposes porn is moot as there are just some things that will be around even if banned, like pot, alcohol, prostitution, etc. My objection to aspects of porn is the abuse, underage, std's etc. if porn is produced with good ethics and safe sex in mind then I have no issue with it.
I am practicing not judging women by the clothes they don't wear on the Internet and porting it to real life whenever I have the presence of mind to do so.
Let them decide for themselves what they want to do with their lives. I'm sure there are social costs, but that is the price of freedom.
It's like asking whether gambling is harmful. To some, very definitely so. To others, not so much. As a young'n, I found Sears catalogs erotic. Was it harmful? Not to the models, they got their hundred bucks. To me, yes, my right palm still has a five o'clock shadow. (To millennials: never mind.) Come on, porn itself is not the problem. Catholic priests, manipulators, abusers, slavers, child exploiters, evangelists, sociopaths, and even cougars (yes, I am talking to you, Irene) are the real problem. But they are, of course, a problem on so many other levels other than just the fact that they watched some porn. I say let them porn their selves into oblivion, and leave the rest of us alone. Say, can I borrow your Victoria's Secret catalog?
I don't have a problem with porn per se, I watch it with my husband. Underage kids shouldn't be exposed to it and it can be addictive. Also don't like when I see some of the girls high on drugs and being abused, so yeah there is a very dark side to it I am very much against.
The "desperate drug addicted porn star" is really just an old stereotype that should die. There are bad people in the porn and sex work industry, just like any industry because we're all the same people. We have direct access to all types of sex workers now a days because of social media. And the biggest complaint they have is the societal stigma that comes from them just doing sex work. Men and women both. As far as protecting kids, almost everybody has either seen or heard their parents having sex. You've been exposed to sex way before you knew about porn. It's only weird if you make it weird.
the right only seems to have a problem with human sexuality in modern times, not the timeless, abomination of hypocrisy.
I am using porn to get used to modern women being their modern selves in modern times. I love modern times.
I dunno. Never really saw the point of watching others do something that I could actually be participating in myself. To each his own.
The Right's hypocrisy on this knows no bounds....take "The Daily Caller". A rightwing website that will SIMULTANEOUSLY have articles talking about how "liberal sexual immorality is corrupting America"... right beside articles like "Chrissy Tiegan's Latest Nip Slip" and "You're Not Going To Believe How Much Charlotte McKinney Shows Off In Her Latest Fashion Shoot". and the Daily Caller audience accept both.
Psychiatrists have made many studies that propose the following hypothesis: Watching pornography may modify or make changes in Neural pathways and Neural architecture, as well as Neural chemical imbalances affecting the hormone levels produced in the brain stimulating specific parts of the brain and inducing electrical impulses. They also report porn addictions and correlation or casual evidence of modification or perhaps damaged related to excessive orgasms achieved by this means perhaps related to excessive hours spent watching porn and not enough rest.
It is complicated enough that I will make no claims to understanding it, Endocrinology is a specialty unto itself.
Kind of funny that you talk about prudish and old stereotypes but only ask about the harm to women. Anyway, from the viewer perspective, it does not matter what goes on behind the scenes. The porn you watch is the same whether the person is a drug-addled deadbeat, a nympho, was molested by a relative, gets paid $200 or $2000 a scene, has normal relationships off the set, etc. The product is what it is no matter what the back story is. Most studios find a niche and stay with that come hell or high water and that may or may not limit their options. For instance a studio that does a lot of hardcore BDSM will draw different viewers and performers than one that does After-School Lesbo type flicks. There are a lot of different porn production companies, and they run the gauntlet as to how they acquire performers, the backgrounds of said performers, pay & benefits, etc. Some porn is little more than home movies and some is a proper business product with professional performers, crews, etc. There is a little broader a spectrum on the gay porn side though because there is more money there and performers get paid significantly better as a result if they are with a good studio. They can also afford better testing programs and protocols to reduce risks of transmissions if they are an established studio.
I definitely think over-consuming porn, just like over-consuming anything elser, will have its horrible side-effects. For example I am sure it certainly will ruin your perception of what sex is; As porn is not real and the women in it are all fake too, actual, real women won't be able to "get you off" beause you need that faked stimuli. Isn't "porn-impotence" an atual, documented diagnosis? Also I am certain it can have horrible effects on on ones confidence and self-esteem or make it worse than it already is if you're one of those who is already stuck in the spiral- "I can't get a girl in real life, luckily I have porn!" "Omg, I would never be able to find a girl like that!" "Omg mine is not that big!" etc etc. Overall I have absolutely nothing against porn, but if it becomes and addiction or the only thing that can please you...Then you obviously have issues.
Just as information: many websites deliver ad content that is relevant to YOUR browsing habits. They don't choose the ads you see, your own browsing habits do.
I think you missed some things in that movie. It highlighted the ugly side of a relationship between a domineering and abusive man and a naive timid woman. It was not so much porn that caused Linda Lovelace harm as it was being forced into it by her husband. When she tried to leave the guy even her mother refused to help telling her instead to go back and obey her husband. Ironically when she finally found someone to help her getting away from her abusive husband it was the producer of Deep Throat who stepped up and put her husband in his place. The movie Lovelace was written the way it was because many of the details are not clear. Linda Lovelace herself stated many contradictions about important details of her story. No doubt her husband was an abusive and controlling guy but how much is not clear. It is also unclear how many people were aware of his behavior towards Linda. Her manipulative and domineering parents also carry some blame. As opposed Linda Lovelace, Marilyn Chambers gave a very different description of Chuck Traynor ( the abusive Husband ) Chambers married him after he divorced Linda and Chambers was nearly as famous a porn star as Linda. Chambers however had decent parents who raised her to take care of herself. She stated her father tried to advise her against a career as an actress or model but only because of the intense competition. According to Chambers Traynor hit her one time and she promptly kicked his ass for doing so and he never laid a hand on her again in anger. Other than that incident she stated he was a decent husband. Linda Lovelace led a rough life there is no doubt and many people hurt her. In general however the pornagraphic profession is just another occupation. Some People hate it and despise themselves for trying it but most performers simply make some money at it and move on.
The main issue is when porn is non-consensual (like some of those "amateur" videos), and then there's also the problem surrounding unrealistic depictions of bodies and sex in porn, like the freaking foot-long cocks and the disproportionate amounts of anal etc., ridiculously long, er, durations, and so on. But I think as long as we acknowledge that porn is unrealistic as heck (and I think we can do that), this shouldn't be an issue. And to be honest, we probably wouldn't get off as much from realistic porn with micro-cocks and hairy women, anyway. Just sayin'.
It is not just the right that is against porn. Liberal Sweden outlawed it. Many feminists here are against it.
