Math Magazine and 'good' porn.

[MrsToddsShortcut]

While I can see what she is trying to do, is the concept of 'nice'/'good' porn still not skirting around the same ballpark as all the hideous, damaging degrading stuff? It's still effectively saying porn is okay. Or would you say this is closer to erotic writing, I.e no real people involved? Is it just the wide end of a very nasty wedge? Genuinely not sure how I feel about this.

Huff post article about Math magazine

It would be difficult to argue that this poor women hasn't been harmed by porn.

Harmed by the malicious action of an ex-boyfriend and/or the three other people she sent it to who then posted it online surely?

Jeaus H Christ - if ever one needed an illustration of exactly the utterly shitty attitude towards other people tgat porn engenders, surely that last post is it? Yes, because the people clicking on it and making fucking t shirts of it weren't in any way complicit...

Yes but also harmed by the people who watched the video and laughed about it and by the people who put something she said on a t shirt and wore it. And by a culture that made those men feel like it was ok to post the video online.

If we had a culture where porn was less acceptable/desirable and where women's feelings were routinely considered this would've been much less likely to happen.

Cross post with Felas.

And how many of those people doing the clicking were the sort who say "but I'm an ethical porn consumer, because I only watch home made stuff..."

Repeats till blue in the face: YOU CANNOT TELL THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF PRODUCTION JUST BY LOOKING AT THE END PRODUCT!

"I'm astonished that anyone can look at that list (or at the front page of something like Porn Hub) and think to themselves 'Well I certainly won't believe that there's any harm here until I see irrefutable proof that these specific videos cause deaths'."
Thank was a great list.

And this is the adverts for the normal stuff -- the common, everyday, loads of blokes click on it porn. This is now standard in terms of what people watch.

The bottom line is, I don't want our daughters and grand daughters to have to live in a society where this is standard entertainment based on the current relations between the sexes.

Well I think it gets confusing because on the one hand you're talking about filmed pornography causing harm and on the other hand you're talking about the people who were complicit, who made t-shirts, who posted unpleasant things online. You're talking about things at a patriarchal societal level.

So when you say that this woman was harmed by porn are you saying that porn is responsible for all these attitudes and beliefs? Porn is responsible for her deciding to film the sex act? Porn is responsible for creating the kind of people that posted it online? Porn is responsible for creating the values of the people that printed the t-shirts and made the comments?

In short, do you believe that in a world without porn (not a world without patriarchy, but a world without porn) that incident would not have happened?

Yes, that incident would not have happened. How fucking dim do you have to be to think otherwise?

Yes, the patriarchy would continue to harm women in various ways, but this specific incident would not have happened.

TheGhostOfTroubledJoe
Re -It would be difficult to argue that this poor women hasn't been harmed by porn.

"Harmed by the malicious action of an ex-boyfriend and/or the three other people she sent it to who then posted it online surely?"

Plus the million plus people who watched it and the company that would not remove it.

What a shitty society we live in. How very evil men get to watch this stuff and so many women suffer. I think real men don't need to watch prostituted women to get their jollies.

buffy or in a world where men did not expect to be able to see women being fucked left right and centre, there would even be men searching on line for 'revenge porn'!

I think real men don't need to watch prostituted women to get their jollies.

Sadly, those men are very real. You are using the No True Scotsman fallacy here.
Good men don't watch porn. However, the other kind of man is also real. That's the whole problem!

Plus the million plus people who watched it and the company that would not remove it.

Exactly.

A male acquaintance of mine admitted to watching the Gina Lisa Lohfink rape video for, uh, "research", and felt like a really good guy for agreeing with me that it was rape.

Yeah. Three guesses as to why I don't see him very often anymore.

*Hmm. In a world without the means to distribute widely and access easily films of people having sex, could the film of this woman having sex been distributed widely and accessed easily?

Tune in next week when we discuss the thorny question of whether, in a world without motorised vehicles, people could still be injured in motor vehicle accidents.*

Yes, well top facetious answer there. Of course, in my hypothetical world without porn I hadn't also rid the world of all mobile phones, all mobile recording equipment, the Internet, all social media and the global economy. Still, as you astutely point out, if we could return the world to the dark ages we could really start make a dent in the circulation of mediated images of sex.

For what little it's worth I remain anti-porn (that's all porn, not just filmed) but that doesn't mean I find the arguments against porn mentioned on this thread particularly compelling. As the thread seems to be moving more towards sneering self-righteousness and away from interesting discussion I think I'll go back to reading and not contributing.

For what little it's worth I remain anti-porn (that's all porn, not just filmed) but that doesn't mean I find the arguments against porn mentioned on this thread particularly compelling.

If you don't find any of the arguments in this thread compelling, then why are you against porn in the first place?

Surely, the fact that porn harms people is like the number 1 reason to be against it?

Sure, there's some wankers who noticed that wanking to porn makes their orgasms less satisfying, but that's like, a rather small group.

Porn is a much to blame for that tragedy as smart phones.The issue is the reaction of Italian society. The bullying and the meme making etc.

The article indicates she sent it herself to taunt her ex? He should have called the police. Is there an expectation of privacy when sending unsolicited explicit videos of yourself.

There are two ways this tragedy could have been avoided. The female not sending it, and whoever shared it not doing so. Blaming porn doesn't really make sense.

That seems somewhat inconsistent Joe. Sour grapes?

Sour grapes? About what?
I don't think it's inconsistent. In a binary choice for or against you can end up on one side via a different route to someone else can't you? Or are you one of these people who think that all people who voted for Brexit did so out of racism?

I should clarify, perhaps that I'm anti-porn on a personal level on moral grounds. That's not the same thing as saying I want all porn banned of course, just that it's not something I'm comfortable with.

"The female not sending it" - what a fascinating choice of wording there. Talk about dehumanising her. Try using the word "woman". It might even enable you to make the cognitive leap to seeing women as human beings.

vestal I meant men who watch porn seen't good guys.

I use female and male a lot in work life. Especially when writing. Sometimes you slip into it. People are pedantic.

"The female not sending it" - what a fascinating choice of wording there. Talk about dehumanising her. Try using the word "woman". It might even enable you to make the cognitive leap to seeing women as human beings.

Instead of female or woman maybe try Tiziana Catone because, you know, that was her name.

Joe what do you mean by self righteous? Is holding an opinion self righteous?

People are pedantic.

You have no idea

I'm astonished that anyone can look at that list (or at the front page of something like Porn Hub) and think to themselves 'Well I certainly won't believe that there's any harm here until I see irrefutable proof that these specific videos cause deaths'.

I would be profoundly disappointed if you were actually astonished. You have clearly superior critical thinking skills Buffy, there is no need to pander to a crowd by standing on a soapbox made of affected astonishment.

Clearly the videos cause violence and deaths, there are countless things in the world that set people on a path of violence and murder. But if people contend that porn increases violence in society we do not live in an information vacuum to answer that particular question. Given the rapid rise of the net and what it provided, the sheer scale of it, it should undeniably manifest in crime statistics 10-15 years out from the internet boom. Just as crime fell in particular US states two decades after they legalised abortion, because wanted babies had better adult outcomes, porn via the net should have given rise to increased violent crime statistics after 10-15 years, particularly against women.

I asked what happened in the UK but nobody answered. I did not know myself and was genuinely curious when I asked. I would have thought that, had the statistics made the case, a dozen people would bring them up. Instead there evolved a path of personal targeting, accusations of insensitivity and ignorance of the grim ends of individual women, while people made comforting nods of support for each other and their views.

So I looked up UK statistics myself. They made it perfectly clear why the thread evolved the way it did, and I think you are smart enough to realise on which side the lax critical thinking lies.