Arguments for and against making porn illegal

SGB "Picking her as the poster child" is not what anyone is doing here and it is completely missing the point of my posting of actual footage that happens to be part of a montage she put together to say so. Besides, the porn industry has a huge number of powerful people with a vested interest (wealthy porn barons and a large percentage of the male population of the world who use it) so it is no suprise that someone who speaks out like Shelley Lubben will be villified.

"traditional type that doesn't involve the women being exploited" unfortunately the sex industry has always involved exploitation and porn is no exception. Take 'Deep throat" for example. Also its not just exploitation that's the problem. Filmed abuse being enjoyed by millions is not a good thing.

I think that each case has to looked at separately because there is porn that is the traditional type that doesn't involve the women being exploited and there is porn that is sinister and dangerous. I have no idea if the former leads to the later, but fair legislation needs to be put in place to differentiate between the two.

My sympathy for her is pretty limited: she puts me in mind of the sort of person who got mugged by members of a different ethnic group and expects to be allowed a free pass to be racist against that specific ethnic group.

Picking her as the poster child for The Real Evils Of Porn is a bit like picking Jordan as the shining star of Empowerfulizing Non-Feminism.

Exactly.

I don't give 2 shits if Shelley is a feminist or not

I can find sympathy for her...what sort of person couldn't ?

I didn't read the whole thing, but it seems to be saying that Shelley Lubben is not a feminist.

So what ? I never assumed she was. That doesn't make her a liar and her testimony is still valuable.

I didn't argue that she was credible

I believe that she got fucked up by her time in the sex industry, and I am uncomfortable with such a human being being slated so comprehensively here

AF, she didn't just 'get religion' she's a racist nutjob who started a fundamentalist organisation to 'rescue' sex workers by stigmatizing them and had her hand well in the till. She's not credible at all.

so, Shelley Lubben is fucked up by her experiences in the sex industry

she isn't a "reliable" witness to the years she spent off her tits to simply get through hours of filmed sexual abuse

she got religion

hold the front page !

Here is an anti-porn feminist stating that she has problems with Shelly Lubben.

I think I would turn to religion (or anything really) if I had experienced what she experienced

horrible

SGB that is really weird. Shelley Lubban is now religious, but that doesn't mean that the evidence is inadmissible. I don't see why you think it is necessary to dismiss it or her.

Oh Shelley Lubben is an attention-seeking Jeezus-jumper whos back story doesn't stand up to much close examination.

I don't think banning it is the answer.
It'd be great if it just drifted away as an anachronism like the belief in black witches or whatever. What the hell were we thinking? How on earth did society accept all those assumptions that made porn so normal and matter of fact

To anyone interested, on the clip at 54 seconds - its not clear what act is going on, but the woman is distressed and crying- says:

"stop please....I'm just not used to people being mean to me.... I know its just acting..... but subconsciously I don't"

Should gay-porn be banned?

It is a short thing put together by former porn star Shelley Lubben about the realities of the industry.

Although this is besides the point, it is worth pointing out that pretending to have a cck stuck up your ase as an actor, is different from 'actually' having a cck stuck up your ase. The difference between porn and acting, is that the stuff in porn is real (that's the point isn't it?) and acting is acting - the fact that they have the confusing name of 'porn actor/actress' - doesn't change the fact that the only acting that they are doing is pretending that it doesn't hurt, that they are enjoying it, that they want it, etc....

Don't be daft sgb. Hating porn, wanting to ban it is NOT more evidence of wishing to cause harm than actually calling someone a cunt plus actually penetrating them.

I'm not going to click on your link FU as I have a sharp-eared DS running round the house. However, whatever this film clip is, is your argument that porn performers are not actors even when they are performing an agreed role for an agreed fee? That this particular actor is an unwilling participant in this particular clip? Or that porn performers are too stupid to distinguish between fantasy and reality?

solidgoldbrass- "porn performers are just as capable of other actors of understanding that a nasty word said during a performance is acting"

Here is some evidence that what you said is not actually true - check out what she says at 54 seconds:

serious trigger warning

Foodunit: porn performers are just as capable of other actors of understanding that a nasty word said during a performance is acting, not personal abuse. Are you really trying to suggest that no actor should ever have to hear abusive language from another actor in the course of a performance?
Or is this the usual pro-censorship idiocy of 'Oh well, art is all right, it's just that nasty stuff we want banned' when it is not possible to draw up a proper objective procensorship law, and most of the people in favour of censorship have intentions far more harmfull than someone calling someone else a cunt at some point.

On Saturday I asked about how Page 3 of the Sun should be treated, as being just about the mildest form of pornography there is--but as we all know, it's offensive and damaging by being so ubiquitous in the way it's distributed. It seems to me that claims that porn is harmful to the participants fails here. The women pictured in that paper are volunteers who think it's fun, though maybe some of them regret it later.

I think it's a demonstration that there's a range of harm done to the people who are shown in pornography, just as there is a range of images produced, and (most likely) a range of preferences for the consumers. If some of it should be illegal, we have to lay down a threshold where we say "beyond this point it's too harmful to be allowed". The trouble is there's no consensus on what that point should be. It just seems guaranteed that there will be some frontier which will be fought over from both sides.

TeiTetua that is out of context

• a more fitting meat analogy would be if someone said there was no need to ban meat because a lot of people are vegetarian. Clearly that isn't good enough to someone who believes all meat eating should be banned.

With the 'meat' of the sex industry: violent, misogynist, harmful porn, there are many arguments as to why the people who believe they only like the non-harmful (vegetarian) stuff are probably deluding themselves about the apparent 'fun' that the participants are having (since it too is probably also violent, misogynist and harmful - just not overtly so).

A lot of people are vegetarian, so why the hell is meat so popular?