Skeptic Project

A necessary form of freedom of expression? Or a disgraceful, misogynistic poison?

Discuss.

If women are to be empowered and capable of making their own decisions, that includes being in pornography. I think women who oppose pornography on the basis that it "exploits" women are just hypocritical cunts who are actually more sexist than any man who watches pornography. If women are capable that means they don't need protection like children. It's extremely condescending to think otherwise, especially coming from another woman.

Aaron makes an excellent point. This issue is not black and white. In addition to the percentage that Aaron requested, I would add in a percentage of those who get into the business solely due to a pre-existing drug addiction. Either gender is fine.

Thinking about this stuff makes professional porn unwatchable.

I'm not saying that people don't become porn actors for the wrong reasons, but people also become doctors for the wrong reasons all the time. I think the issue at hand is if pornography itself represents some degenerative moral expression, or if its really a part of sexual expression that has found avenues through the capitalist-marketing structure.

I don't know if there's research to back this up, but I'm inclined to believe that sexual abuse, neglect, and drugs as a child correlate more with becoming a porn star than becoming a doctor. You make a valid point in that it's impossible to find a model person that was raised in a perfect environment. Everyone makes decisions based on a unique value system that can't completely be described as "right" or "wrong". Some porn stars do come from good families, which is why I'm not suggesting that porn stars are inherently unwise.

I don't think the women who are in pornography due to unfortunate circumstances want anyone to rescue them nor do I think anyone should assume that responsibility.

But that doesn't mean we shouldn't be intellectually honest about the subject.

Not all pornography is degrading to women just like some pornography is degrading to men.

In addition to what Matt said, why do we also assume that a woman in pornography needs to be rescued because something horrible happened to her? If we're going to do that, we need to assume the same thing about men then, because it's just as stupid. Women like sex too, I'm sure some of you on the forum don't believe that. As someone that has done pornography, I find it offensive to assume I've been raped/molested/abused/etc.

I think you misunderstood my point. I was referring to Aarons evaluation of the individuals who potentially make up the pornography industry and the potential for making wrong-headed decisions. All I wanted to bring to the table was that this is true of so many things in society that it isn't particularly useful for thinking through pornography as an object. My own position is that pronography, like so many other things, is only given meaning by those who consume it and those who produce it. If rather sketchy means are used to rope actors into performing in pornography, thats an ethical breech. Likewise, if there are people who use pornography as a means to achieving some depraved moral stance, that too is an ethical breech. But in between, there is a wide range of meanings for pornography to take on. It has existed for centuries and will continue to exist, and its really a matter of the meaning that is ascribed to it, not anything inherent about it.

@ Aaron

guns also have a non practical application- sport. That doesn't create a moral dilema for the object of the gun. Pornography serves as a form of entertainment, and one that does not immediately break any ethical qualities unless it is used through a twisted lens. If your evaluation comes down to practicality, you've just found yourself the most sparsely populated material world.

As someone that has done pornography, I find it offensive to assume I've been raped/molested/abused/etc.

Some studies are discussed in this thread: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=254464

If someone says, "oh you did porn? you must've been abused as a child", then that's something to find offensive. If they say, "oh you did porn? were you abused as a child?", then it's not as offensive since there seems to be a correlation with porn and childhood abuse. Although, I wouldn't explicitly and directly ask a porn actress such a question. :P

I do pornography for sport, Kaiser; "Sport fucking" as it's called.

You know, in track and field we have relay races as part of our sport. You know what else can have relay events?

/juvenile joke.

That still doesn't resolve the question of non-practical expressions and marketable goods. What is to be done with all the shades of entertainment that exist?

It would depend on how it impacts society. If porn can be handled maturely by adults, then I guess it suffices as a form of free speech. Some forms of porn crosses the line, but not most.

Things should stay the way they are, I guess. The original reason for me commenting in this thread was to bring up the fact that many porn stars were abused as children. I don't know of many other professions that have such a high rate. Regardless, I don't know if anything needs to change because of that.

It'd make a lot more sense to quench childhood abuse than to stifle the porn industry. Attack the root not the flower.

I wonder if more porn actresses are influenced by abusive childhoods or by financial needs.

@ Aaron

Porn is a huge industry. Rakes in millions a year. Whether or not it's beneficial, it does make a lot of money.

As what earlier posts have said, I think it's about the mental status of the men and women participating in it, as well as the ethics of the content in question.

I remember watching "A Serbian Film" (a feature film).... ugh...

Let's not derail a great topic about porn to talk about disgusting movies.