Me on porn.

[RandySF]

If you don't like it, don't watch it.

[Callmecrazy]

2. Would I know you if i saw you?

I don't know if I'd like it if I don't know what you look like.

[Dash87]

3. .

[arely staircase]

72. lol nt

[dawg]

4. Is that also how you feel about kiddie porn?

What about "simulated" kiddie porn, where the actress is 18 but appears 12 and is portrayed in the plot of the story as being 12?

[penultimate]

7. Kids are harmed in kiddie porn and there are laws that prevent children from

being subjected to such abuses even if it isn't being filmed or photographed. Therefore I don't see how you can compare the two.

As for simulated kiddie porn. That's a tough one, much like the simulated rape. But I personally think so long as all parties are of age and consenting, there isn't much that can or should be done about it. We may not understand it or think it's healthy, but it is adults taking part in it. I was talking to this girl on the dating website okcupid once, and she started talking about this strange daddy/"little" fetish thing she has. She sent me links to her tumblr page, and it just kinda freaked me out enough to get me to distance myself. But that's what she's into and seems to enjoy. Should we prevent her and her significant others from taking part in such things? If so, what right do we have? Should we only prevent it if it's being filmed and shared? If so, what gives us that right? The same goes for "rape" fantasy porn too. I find it hard to see what right any of us have to force our personal preferences on to others. Of course that all goes out the window if none of it is consensual. Which is why actual child porn is not acceptable.

[dawg]

8. You gave an intelligent, well thought-out answer. I disagree with you ...

but respect you for clearly stating and defending your opinion.

We live in a society that does not allow adults to make their own decisions about marijuana use. It doesn't allow legal adults (18 year-olds) to purchase beer. Clearly, as a society, we have taken the position that we have the right to regulate and limit the sort of products that can be produced and distributed.

Personally, I don't have a problem with porn in general. But I am very concerned about porn that attempts to depict rape or pedophilia.

[LAGC]

10. Well, you better get out your ban-hammer then.

Because there's an awful lot of Japanese anime that falls in those categories.

Just sayin'...

[dawg]

12. But do people try to get off to anime?

Wait .... forget I asked that question.

[loli phabay]

14. yeah, its s question that you probuably wont want answered.

[Kurska]

19. If you're looking for a fair or reasoned legal precient for limiting freedom, marijuana prohibition

ain't it.

[penultimate]

39. I disagree with laws limiting what adults can do

I personally do not drink nor do I do any drugs (not even pot), but I do not think that laws should limit adults from partaking in such activities. Only when they directly affect other non-willing participants should laws be made to stop that. For example, people shouldn't be allowed to drive under the influence, because that adversely affects people. The same can even be said for smokers and second hand smoke in public enclosed locations. That affects other non-consensual people.

I think there is room to say that drugs, alcohol, porn, simulated rape porn, simulated violence have negative indirect affects on some people in some situations, or even society as a whole. But that's difficult to prove or pinpoint, in fact, I'm sure we can say that about anything though. There are plenty of studies out there that discuss the negative affects on society that eating meat has too.

Fake rape and kiddy porn is weird and I wouldn't want anything anything to do with the people who are into that. I would not trust them, because, in my opinion, 'normal' people don't get off on rape and kiddy porn. But again, if it's something consensual adults are filming in the privacy of their homes or studios, I just can't find a logical reason to deny them that right just because of my personal opinion. This might be a bit ridiculous, but let's say someone has a very realistic looking fake sheep (or a human in a sheep costume), should it be illegal for them to use it as a sex toy and sell videos of it?

[Kurska]

18. Kids can't consent and simulated anything should be illegal, no matter how disgusting it is n/t

[RandySF]

46. I'm sorry.

I thought common sense was implied.

[dawg]

49. I don't think hardly anyone who regularly posts on this board would want to ban porn.

But there have been big discussions lately over "rape" porn and porn that simulates sex with minors. I think those are very nuanced issues that go beyond the "If you don't like it, don't watch it" bumpersticker mentality.

That being said, for most forms of porn I absolutely agree with you.

[MNBrewer]

50. What about where two obviously adult men in their 40s are having sex

and the banter goes "Oh yes, daddy, fuck your little son in the ass"? It's a simulated scenario of kiddie porn. Should it be punished as though minors were harmed in its making?

[dawg]

52. I think you lost your point at ...

"obviously adult men in their 40s". No, of course I don't think such a movie should be banned. On the other hand, if it were an 18 year-old playing a 15 year-old character, that's another thing altogether.

[MNBrewer]

55. I don't know how the law makes that distinction. It's a depiction of underage sex, is it not?

It's legal if the "kid" looks 45.
It's legal if the "kid" looks 35.
It's legal if the "kid" looks 25?
What about 24?
22?
21?
What IS the difference in looks between a boyish 21 year old and manly 17 year old?

What evidence would a prosecutor need to bring the case to trial?

[dawg]

56. If the character played by the 40 year-old had been consistently depicted as being underage ...

then I think he would have evidence to bring the case to trial if he really wanted to do so. He would then be laughed out of court due to the fact that the actor was obviously a middle-aged man.

To me, if you want to make an explicit movie with a very young looking 18 or 19 year old man .... fine. But don't depict his character as being underage.

I don't have any problem at all with porn that depicts consensual sex between two adults. (Or three, or four ...)

[loli phabay]

5. better question would be, would you ban all porn and whats the cutoff point between porn

And art. Now to your post, i agree with you.

[rrneck]

9. There is no cutoff between porn and art. Porn is art. nt

[loli phabay]

16. i would agree, everyone has their own taste in art kinda like music or food.

[JaneyVee]

6. I'm pro-choice.

[page of coins]

11. How about if you are in a relationship with someone who likes it

and you don't?

[loli phabay]

15. kinda like sports or chinese foods. its something couples work out.

Only issue is if its hidden or lied about.

[dawg]

21. Then it should be only an occasional thing that the porn-liking partner ...

indulges in whenever the porn-hating partner is not around. The porn-loving partner should be mindful of her significant other's feelings, and should always be vigilant to make sure her porn use does not become detrimental to her real relationship.

And the porn-hating partner should respect his partner's different sensibilities so long as they don't prove detrimental to the relationship. He should even try to find common ground with her, softcore erotica maybe.

Couples must respect each other's differences, but together is better than separate IMHO.

[dawg]

51. Just as with gambling, it ruins some people's lives.

Most people can handle it just fine, and I'm sure there are millions of couples whose lives have been greatly enhanced by pornography.

I would never advocate for a general ban on porn.

But, just as with gambling and alcohol, there are dangers. And I think that we liberals are too quick to bury our heads in the sand and pretend that those dangers don't exist.

[RandySF]

47. That's something you have to work out, then.

[Vashta Nerada]

13. Agreed.

This is the only logical response about porn. It should end all discussion.

[dawg]

17. Yeah. Just like guns, gambling, prostitution, drugs. No one thinks any of those ...

should be regulated either. Right?

[Kurska]

20. Don't use the word regulated, when what you mean is banned.

All four of those things should be regulated, but an adult should have a default right to access any four of them if they so wish.

I don't get how repeatedly citing some of the dumbest banning decision our society has ever made in reference to the thing you want banned, is strengthening your argument.

[dawg]

22. I would never be in favor of a blanket ban on porn.

I just don't like people getting off to simulated rape or pedophilia. Especially when it's marketed as "real".

[Kurska]

24. You're free to to not like it all day, all night and everyday ending in y.

That doesn't mean that we should start throwing people in jail for FICTION. It is fictional, it isn't real. If you want to talk to about a ban on marketing it as a real, now there is somewhere where I think we can find a little common ground. However, pointing a camera at a legal and consenting act, even if it is simulating something horrible, shouldn't get people thrown in jail.

[dawg]

26. I wouldn't jail anyone unless there was "actual" rape, statutory or otherwise.

But I would take away any possible profit motive for producing or distributing rape porn or simulated kiddie porn.

[Kurska]

28. That is a good sentiment, but I don't know how it is workable in a constitutional sense

If something is legal to produce and consume, doesn't it also have to be legal to sell? I can't think of any item that you can make and freely distribute, but are not allowed to sell.

[dawg]

34. I support making it illegal to "produce" or "distribute".

We do this with drugs, games of chance, some firearms. We should probably do it for cigarettes and the KFC double-down as well.

Hell, didn't NYC just ban Big Gulps?

[Kurska]

37. You're still encountering the freedom of speech problem.

It is fictional material. Americans currently have a absolute right to write and then film any fictional material using fictional character they want. Once you decide that is no longer the case, I'm not sure I am comfortable with where society is going. Remove the profit motive? Fine, but people have a right to freedom of speech.

You at least seem to be adjusting your position, which I do appreciate.

[dawg]

42. I'm not adjusting my opinion; I'm just explaining it better.

Free speech has never been a blanket protection that covered any and all forms of communication. For instance, try acting out one of those movies in the park next summer - see how far your free speech rights carry you.

Likewise, how many jurisdictions in the country would allow such a story, with actual graphic sex, to be performed onstage as a play? Sure, there are plenty of places where it would be legal. But there are plenty of places where it would be banned also. The precedents are there for regulating this sort of thing. It's just a matter of what standards we, as a society, are willing to enforce.

[Kurska]

43. Citing precedents I disagree with probably won't win me over to your side.

Laws against public sexual performance have been used to disproportionately against gay people and other vulnerable sexual minorities for decades. That have even been used to crush depictions of gay life that aren't even very sexual.

I'm very curious how you'll respond to my question about determining what is or isn't porn. It is down thread.

[dawg]

48. Determining what is or isn't porn ...

I don't care about that because I don't want to ban porn. Whether or not something is porn isn't really an issue with me. But ...

If they did ban porn (a move I would fight), and I was somehow forced to be the guy who decided what was porn and what was not, and I was not allowed to let almost everything slide (which would be my natural inclination), I think this would be my measuring stick ...

If the main purpose of the film is to tell a story, then it isn't porn. If the main purpose of the film is to arouse and titillate, then it's porn.

[Kurska]

53. Well see, you need to determine what is or isn't porn.

Because if you want to make the inclusion of rape into porn illegal, you need an ironclad way of determining what is or is not porn. Why? It is simple, without one you'd also be banning the examination of rape by fiction for all other literary works. If you want to ban something just for porn you need to identify what porn is.

And let me tell you, millions of very smart people have been trying to do that for decades and the best they can come up with is "I know it when I see it". If you're comfortable with judges deciding what does or not does not have artistic merit and who should be punished for producing the wrong kind of fiction, than you're a very different person than I.

[Warren DeMontague]

61. So you want to fill our prisons with people consenting adults who fuck in front of cameras?

Good point about the drug war. It's working out GREAT.

[dawg]

63. Read all my other posts in this thread and you'll have your answer.

Hint: I don't support throwing *anyone* into jail over rape porn or simulated kiddie porn.

[LittleBlue]

23. How would you regulate porn?

What specifically would you want to do?

[dawg]

25. I'd be okay with banning rape porn or porn purporting to depict sex with minors.

I wouldn't be okay with throwing anyone into jail over it, but I would levy harsh enough fines to discourage anyone with a profit motive from producing or distributing it.

[Kurska]

27. Heavy fines?

So if you're a super rich guy, you can consume all the rape porn you want, but if you're a poor person and your underage son downloads a video on your computer your are screwed with a capital S.

Don't pretend you're being lenient to people for consuming fiction you do not like, just because you aren't throwing them in jail. Most people value their livelihood as much as their freedom.

How bout we NOT massively fine people for consuming fictional material, would that possibly work?

[dawg]

30. No fine at all for consumption.

I would fine those who produce and distribute. This isn't something I'm comfortable letting the invisible hand of the market determine.

[Kurska]

35. I can say one thing

At least your heart is in the right place and you're willing to make compromises about it.

I'd have to see the specific law (and whether it would be ruled constitutional is another matter entirely), but there are far worse arrangements than the one you have proposed.

[LittleBlue]

32. Thankfully, that's unconstitutional

In fact I'd be willing to bet the majority of that sort of porn is already produced in foreign countries. The efforts you speak of are already rendered ineffective by the nature of the internet.

[dawg]

38. We can't stop meth either.

But I think we should try.

Admittedly, porn isn't a major issue with me. I only jumped on this thread because I see the same ridiculous absolutism on this issue that I see with the gun debate. Just because I don't think you need a 40 round magazine doesn't mean I want to grab all your guns. Likewise, just because I don't think rape porn or simulated kiddie porn should be legal, doesn't mean I want to ban all porn.

[Kurska]

40. How do you define what is or isn't porn?

Alright, so lets say you have banned simulated rape in porn. Alright, now anyone who has rape in their work of fiction has to be very worried that that work of fiction will be determined to be porn. Who is going to decide what is or isn't porn? A porn producer could throw in 20 minutes of fluff story into the video and then sell it. A legitimate writer might want to address the topic of rape in a realistic and vivid way. There is no objective standard for differentiating between the two. The only way to do it would be how we did it in the past, drag the person in front of the judge and have him decide if the it has "artistic merit". Of course, in the good ole days such laws were used disproportionately to punish gay people and unpopular sexual minorities or artists unpopular with the powers that be.

I find the idea of a small group of elite individuals deciding what represents legitimate artistic output in our society far more offensive than the most disgusting consensual act between adults. Especially considering there are many well documented cases of such elite groups of judges abusing their power throughout history to crush unpopular speech.

[dawg]

44. Legitimate writers depicting rape as part of a story should ...

probably refrain from having the actors perform actual penetrative sex on film if they want to feel safe from my wrath.

[Kurska]

45. There is a well established legal precedent forbidding differential treatment of different artistic

mediums.

If you can do it in book you have to be able to do it in a video game or do it on film (provided it is simulated, but the others are simulations too if you really think about it).

[Vashta Nerada]

58. Since you don't like simulated rape porn, don't watch it.

Thankfully adults are free to do what they choose. If two consenting adults consent to doing simulated rape porn, I'm glad they have that choice to do it.

Don't like it, don't do it. Don't like it, don't watch it.

[dawg]

59. And if you don't like assault rifles, don't buy one.

It's really simple when you think about things that way, isn't it?

[Vashta Nerada]

67. Assault rifles kill.

Porn affects no one except those who watch.

[dawg]

68. Rifles, by themselves, can't kill anyone.

Now it's true that someone could choose to act out some horrible fantasy using their rifle, but that's hardly the rifle's fault, is it?

Edited to clarify: Actually, I favor reasonable restrictions on guns, including bans on high-capacity magazines. But the so-called logic of, "don't like it; then don't buy it" could be improperly applied to the gun issue as well as to hundreds of other situations where common sense limits and regulations would make more sense.

[Vashta Nerada]

69. This isn't about assault rifles.

It's about porn and what adults choose to do.

[dawg]

70. Adults choose to buy assault rifles.

Shooting them is fun. They look cool. I don't have one. That's not my thing, but I have friends who love them.

I think they should be restricted, personally. I don't give a damn that my friends have been safe with their assault rifles so far. I believe that common sense limits should be put in place for the benefit of society.

Same goes for rape porn and simulated kiddie porn. I don't *know* that viewing those images makes it more likely that such fantasies will be acted upon, but I think reasonable, common sense restrictions are called for - just like with guns, and just like with *some* drugs.

FWIW, I'm not anti-porn, I just think there should be limits.

[Vashta Nerada]

74. Good thing the government doesn't think the same way you or

Rick Santorum do.

I suppose you believe that playing violent video games leads to violent behavior as well.

[dawg]

76. Yeah, good thing.

Otherwise, there might be no rape porn or simulated kiddie porn. And that would be a sad, sad world that no one would want to live in.

[Vashta Nerada]

78. Good thing those all involve consenting adults.

And good thing we have laws against kiddie porn and rape.

Your argument is meaningless.

[nomorenomore08]

81. So we can't even discuss the things that bother us? Even if we say explicitly - as dawg has on this

thread - that we're not interested in throwing anyone in jail?

For the record, I did rec this OP, because in most cases I agree with the sentiment. But criticism of the porn industry has to be considered just as much a free speech issue as porn itself.

[loli phabay]

82. on this i agree, both sides should discuss it, but realistically its not going to make a difference

In the end. I think a big problem is also both sides talk about different things sometimes and the extreme viewpoint from both sides takes over and it turns into a poo flinging endevour, which though is some fetish its not mine.

[xulamaude]

79. Consume willingly as adults, arguably, but

What about those who are exposed to it against their will? Do you think that there are/could be associated harms?

[nomorenomore08]

85. Generally speaking, I don't think minors should be exposed to hard-core porn

any more than the law should allow them to purchase cigarettes or alcohol, which it doesn't. But just as many kids will inevitably get an older sibling or classmate to buy them some smokes, or a six-pack, I can't see age restrictions on porn consumption being anywhere near universally effective.

But even still, we can and should discuss the issue of who's watching what, and how it may be affecting them.

[RainDog]

93. I don't see absolutism

People here are in general agreement that non-consensual sex acts are not okay for porn. (The disagreement is over what constitutes consent, or whether adult females are capable of consent - and that argument is made by some who call themselves feminist.. that women are incapable of making a choice to participate in porn.)

People here are in general agreement that criminal activities should be prosecuted (again, actual rape and anything involving minors.)

People here are in general agreement that adult material should be limited to adult consumption - i.e. they support age limits on who may purchase porn. Kids can access porn without purchasing it, however, so those who want to keep this away from their children have to take responsibility for filters on their home computing devices - and they have to accept that, if a teenager is determined, she or he will find a way to view these things, but will also know they are doing so outside of parental approval.)

As far as fictional depictions of things that are illegal in fact - banning such things is not, imo, advisable because such depictions are not created just for consumption of those who would choose to do those things, and sometimes those things are done within works that have artistic merit and not to condone them.

So, the issue is not really about banning assault rifles vs. no restrictions at all on porn. The issue is about regulation of porn, with some consumption illegal based upon content or the age of the consumer.

The reality is that, according to statements here, the vast, vast majority of people on DU are agreement about the way in which porn should be handled in our society.

The disagreement is whether or not someone should condemn porn, in and of itself, or condemn those who consume it, or those who don't think the consumers care what another person thinks and that person is protected by free speech conventions in this nation.

So, since both sides of the issue are in general agreement about regulation of porn, how is one side engaged in absolutism to argue that porn is not anyone else's business but those who create and/or consume it?

This seems to be another one of those straw men arguments put forth to allow someone to argue with a position that is not in evidence here.

Why would anyone choose to misrepresent the issue?

This misrepresentation is what leads others to think the anti-porn posters are not arguing honestly.

[dawg]

94. Well, it's good that we at least all agree ...

that depictions of actual rape and child molestation should be banned.

And on the gun control issue, we all agree that shooting an innocent person to death should be a crime as well.

Do you know any gun enthusiasts who argue that they should be allowed to shoot anyone they want? I don't.

Does that mean that they don't have absolutist opinions after all?

[RainDog]

96. It was astonishing to me to read lies about this position

here on DU. It was disgusting or baffling to see so many people here claim that others were in support of actual rape depictions. But I wasn't surprised because I've seen this same tactic, over and over by a few. Maybe it's not a tactic, tho. Maybe it's a lack of reading comprehension and I am assuming more competency by those who do it than they deserve.

Or maybe the point was that they were being absolutists who could not distinguish between fact and fiction. Actually, I don't know that that would be described as absolutist. I think it's children, more likely, who don't distinguish between fact and fiction until they reach a particular point in mental maturation.

After that point, I think the failure to distinguish between fact and fiction has another name, if such a situation is constantly a problem.

As far as your statement about guns relative to absolutist positions on porn, I don't see that you've made an effective comparison.

On other threads on this topic I have also read and noted myself that people here, overall, who have spoken about this topic on this forum also spoke about the need to have regulations regarding porn - regulation of the industry to insure safety for participants, worker protections - this is the general view held about this issue on DU, in spite of certain people here who seem to have a dedication to misrepresent the same.

[dawg]

97. It's astonishing to me that so many people are willing to write ...

long-winded diatribes in defense of rape porn and simulated kiddie porn.

[RainDog]

98. LOL

buh bye!

edit to add in case this demonstration of my point is deleted or alerted upon and disappeared.

dawg (6,114 posts)
97. It's astonishing to me that so many people are willing to write ...

long-winded diatribes in defense of rape porn and simulated kiddie porn.

[dawg]

99. But you support the rape porn and simulated kiddie porn right?

Or am I missing something?

Edited to add: I would never intend to imply that you supported depictions of actual rape or actual child abuse. Your post very clearly indicated that you do not. And for that matter, I don't remember seeing anyone on this board take such a position.

[Warren DeMontague]

60. IF YOU DON'T OPPOSE POT SMOKING YOU SUPPORT CANNIBALISM!!!

Wheeeeeeeeeeeeee!

[dawg]

62. Mmmmmmmmmmmm.........

Long pig!

[Warren DeMontague]

73. It's the other other white meat.

[Deep13]

29. What of the arguments that it is harmful to society generally?

There's the argument that it conditions young men to view women as mere entertainment, and that it pressures young women to see themselves that way.

[Kurska]

33. People have been arguing that certain kinds of fiction are harmful to society for centuries.

Ultimately they've always been wrong and outlawing it never makes the stuff go away in the first place, it just drives it underground. I'd rather have porn legal and regulated so that I can now all the workers are being treated fairly.

[Deep13]

95. Well, talking of illegality is putting the cart before the horse.

First, we would have to ascertain if it is actually harmful. If it is, then we would have to determine what, if anything, the response should be. That could be legal restrictions or it could just be a PSA campaign.

Yes, it is an argument that is often made. Frankly, it may be true often. And even if it is untrue for fiction, violent movies, or video games, it still may or may not be true of apparently violent porn.

[BainsBane]

65. let me paraphrase the general reaction

No one cares. It's all about them.

[egduj]

31. But it can be argued...

Thar the effect porn has on the people who choose to watch it, has a sort of "second-hand" effect on those who choose not to participate in porn watching. As in a higher rate of sexual assault, molestation, and a general degradation on the view of women in a sexual aspect.

Just as in someone's choice to own a gun starts to affect other people who don't choose to own a gun, when that gun owner gets depressed and heads to the closest school. Or when the person who chooses to use drugs decides to get in his car and joins other people on the freeway who don't choose to do drugs.

[Kurska]

41. Except it can't be argued very well with any scientific evidence.

Porn consumption has exploded in the past 30 years, meanwhile sexual assaults are down by I think over 50%. If there was a casual link between porn consumption and rape, we'd see that in the numbers, but we don't.

Meanwhile, the societies with the most rape per per person tend to have bans on porn. Clearly, porn is not the major thing driving the phenomenon of sexual assaults.

[NoOneMan]

77. Yeah, but you can prove anything with facts

[Egalitarian Thug]

57. K&R #5

[BainsBane]

64. Is that also your view on Fox?

Or that if people don't like Walmart they just shouldn't shop there and not bother people about telling others what's wrong with the place? How about banks and Wall Street?

[athenasatanjesus]

66. If you don't like criticism of porn,don't read or listen to it.

[duffyduff]

71. Not that simple.

Exploitation of other people is everybody's business.

[polly7]

75. And what if those adult, consenting women don't see using their bodies

in film and profiting from it as being exploited? It seems being pro-choice for some lasts only until women do something they don't approve of.

I'm 1000% for preventing violence against women, and would hope that anyone advocating for these women to lose the opportunity to do as they please, are also concentrating on actually doing something constructive for those that obviously are being abused and mistreated ... such as working to provide safe havens for them, education and other employment opportunity, being diligent in reporting possible illegal acts, etc. etc. There are so many ways to help. Guilt shaming those who do enjoy being in the profession and those who may watch it may make one feel better, but what real good it's doing is beyond me.

[Yavin4]

80. So, you believe that football should be banned

As well as boxing and MMA fighting. Former porn stars fare a lot better in old age than do former NFL players.

[xulamaude]

83. " Former porn stars fare a lot better in old age than do former NFL players."

How so?

ETA - and if so, in which ways

[Yavin4]

84. Um, have you seen the many media reports about traumatic brain injuries

that former NFL players are suffering from? There was a huge settlement with the NFL about it. Some former players have even killed themselves because of it.

The average porn star fares a lot better in old age than does the average NFL player.

[xulamaude]

86. "The average porn star fares a lot better in old age than does the average NFL player."

Is that so?

Are there as many stats on the health and well-being of the average former porn star as on former NFL players?

ETA - computer crash. apologies for the duplicate
ETA.2 - not a dupe at all

[Yavin4]

87. There are several stats on the health of former NFL players

and they are not good. There are little stats on the health of former porn stars, but that's because their health in old age is not an issue.

[xulamaude]

90. Former porn stars' "health in old age is not an issue."

Okay. Thanks.

[Yavin4]

88. Also, why is there soooo much concern for people using their bodies in porn

but little or no concern about workers in other industries whose bodies get exploited. I mentioned the NFL, boxing, and MMA, but there's also coal mining, the military, police work, fire fighting, etc.

[loli phabay]

89. good points, there are lots of careers where people risk their health in all sorts of ways.

There is also the fact that so much porn nowadays is changing to the amateur web cam interactive stuff. Especially at the more fringe and fetish end.

[xulamaude]

91. "little or no concern about workers in other industries whose bodies get exploited"

Right. Nobody cares about the rights of workers around here...

[Kurska]

100. We haven't seen 12(?) threads recently about coal worker's being exploited

For some reason a person running their body into the ground to provide a living for their family isn't exploitative enough to care, but a woman having sex on a camera is so exploitative is doesn't even matter if she enjoys it, she is still be exploited.

[xulamaude]

103. No, but there have hundreds

(nay, thousands) of threads all over DU for years and years condemning the treatment and conditions that every sort of worker - other than sex-workers - must endure.

Please.

ETA - maybe it's just time for this

[Kurska]

104. Yet, count up the number about sex workers vs. other specific workers in the past few weeks.

Apparently sex worker conditions must be so intolerably worse than every working condition on the planet they deserve such special emphasis.

Or people are using the conditions of sex workers to drive their other purely ideological complaints about pornography.

Nah that couldn't be.

[xulamaude]

105. Exactly - link the last few weeks to years and years

of threads. As I said, maybe it's just time to talk about this for a minute.

Or a couple of weeks out of years and years.

[Kurska]

106. I know you're apparently new here, but we've had weeks of "porn wars" pretty much every year on DU.

The number of threads dedicated to the plight of porn workers far outstrips any other profession on the planet.

[xulamaude]

107. DU can be read by anyone with an internet connection

for years and years.

I beg to differ with your assessment.

[Kurska]

108. Oh I'm sure you're very familiar with DU, I bet you know a lot about the people here.

You're wrong though, there is a pretty standard blowup about this every single year. This one has been particularly fierce though, but it always happens.

[xulamaude]

110. Okay, I'm wrong and you're right. nt

[Kurska]

111. Wow this must be the first time I ever won an argument on the interwebs

I'm going to print out this entire exchange and get my mother to put it on the fridge, if that is cool with you.

[Upton]

92. I have a feeling..

it's because the anti porn crusaders have a lot more going on than just concern about the exploitation of sex workers. It's a convenient vehicle for them to use however..

[Kurska]

101. "It's a convenient vehicle for them to use however.."

[BainsBane]

112. Asking you to think of something is banning?

Somehow I don't think it's the porn that is in danger.

[Rex]

102. Oh, thank goodness, thought you had a youtube link of

nevemind...great weather outside.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

109. gmta

thought I was the only one, haha. Thanks!