is "makelovenotporn" ethical porn?

[vivariumvivariumsvivaria]

Argument with a female friend. I don't think porn can ever be ethical.

She says makelovenotporn is, a site where couples post videos of themselves having sex. They get paid per view. So far, so Only Fans, but the CEO is a woman who says she wants to end rape culture. So the videos are of couples (and more) modelling good relationships and healthy sexual attitudes. You control what sort of material you'd like to watch, so can block stuff that is upsetting or traumatising or just not for you. They don't allow negative comments on the videos and consent is obvious.

I don't use porn. I would scrap the lot of it. But, she may have a point. I do hate to be wrong.

There seem to me to be too ways to approach this question, one more theoretical, and one more pragmatic.

Pragmatically I think you could say that even if pornography could be theoretically ethical, so long as there was monetization of the images you will not be able to ensure that the production and distribution of this material remains ethical.

Theoretically there could be a few issues. One is that you could argue that even if the material is produced and distributed entirely consentually, porn is socially destructive - has a bad affect on attitudes to women, maybe, or something of that kind.

Another approach would be to say that some activities, even if consensual, are inherently psychologically or otherwise unhealthy, and public sexual activity falls under that category.

themselves having sex
is not
modelling good relationships and healthy sexual attitudes.
Its showing 2 (or more?) individuals enacting an act of (not/non) sexual reproduction in front of a camera.
Thats how to do sex not how to like or live with a partner.

healthy sexual attitudes
yet
block stuff that is upsetting or traumatising or just not for you.
So a full range of how to do stuff visual aids.

They get paid per view so its not really about individuals
modelling good relationships
is it

They don't allow negative comments on the videos
So its a no rating system just pick and mix of random option.

consent is obvious

the CEO is a woman who says she wants to end rape culture.
Marketing spin "nice porn works"
They get paid per view
Ok then, but at what %

Did you ever spot that boarding houses or pimping and brothel keeping were the sterotypical women owned business in most Western.

Thank you both. That's really helpful.

Yes, it still makes me uncomfortable. I'm sure there are some women who believe themselves to be enjoying their public sex, but it feels a bit like surrogacy to me - altruistic surrogates have their reasons and and I don't think that's anything other than exploitation of women's bodies either.

Will go back to her with a round 2.

How does this site ensure that the women have (freely) consented to the videos being made and for the videos being posted? How do they know who is getting the money for the videos? I can see that this is as open to exploitation and coercion as any other similar site.

I just googled the site and the home page features porn. How can that possibly be considered ethical - I could be 12 years old?

Encouraging people to sell themselves is not ethical imo.

Also, for I’d question the ‘love’ part as having been produced for this ulterior motive, and more of a performance than anything else.

... is a site where couples post videos of themselves having sex. They get paid per view. So far, so Only Fans, but the CEO is a woman who says she wants to end rape culture

But... sticking up videos of women having sex basically is rape culture, or feeds into rape culture.

Porn makes men envious and sexually aggressive. Gives them sexual dysfunction. All porn does this even it's 10,000% produced by women WELL up for it doing it only with with their husband.

It's the audience. The men. Their pornified minds that are the problem.

Thanks, this has been really useful for countering her arguments.

She's come back to me with www.omgyes.com - which has done research on women's sexual pleasure and has film of women masturbating, to teach women about normal sexual pleasure.

Had a look at the site, the women were paid money for the filming but not an ongoing revenue stream. The research is peer reviewed and published, though funded by the company.

Set up by friends who were fed up about sex ed being so shit.

I'm not sure it's porn, but I'm not sure it's not. She's certainly got me stumped because the women are not having sex with anyone else and I can see that there is a value in women learning more about what feels nice and seeing a range of ordinary women's bodies.

I can't decide if this is porn by another name.

Ah I've looked at OMG YES.com I'm not a paid up member, but that site is entirely women focused.

It's purpose is to teach women to engage with their own sexual pleasure when that's not normally talked about.

Porn depicts women as penis vessels and it's aim is male ejaculation (both during the film and of it's audience). Even if porn is created by women it's overwhelmingly men who are watching it.

If men want to pay up and watch the stuff on omgyes I'd support that because hopefully you'd think they'd get shit hot in bed. Omgyes isn't gratuitous, whereas porn of couples is pretty bog standard problematic.

Ah, that's a point she made, @Linguini - you don't see the women orgasm, it's not watching them masturbate while making eye contact with the camera and perform.

Interesting. So, not porn, but titiallating because sex is, but it's educational in nature and not paying the women click-per-view, but they did get paid for the filming time, so not exploitative.