does not fly.

second. you are under an illusion if you think there are any kinds of regulations and controls in the internet porn, or even the so called legit porn. and if women and our children are not being abused every. single. day. for the purpose of entertaining to jack off to.

I have, however, sometimes run into people who say they are feminists and believe that pornography should be banned because they pornography has negative effects on women. I'm trying to open a line of dialogue with these people about that viewpoint.

What do you support then? You seem to very strongly believe that pornography is a horrible thing. If you don't support banning it, what do you support if anything to try and fix that?

Come on, sea... Dworkin said X, Y and Z... DEFEND IT! EXPLAIN IT NOW!

This thread is about feminist who support banning pornography. You are not a feminists who supports banning pornography.

You are of course free to comment on or in the thread, but I never demanded you explain anything.

I do support bans on child porn and 'rape' porn.

What we need is not to ban all porn, but to challenge the culture which casts women as sex objects. This is part of rape culture. Apparently a lot of people just do not want to look at what's out there. It isn't pretty. Case in point, there is a site out there called 18 and Abused. Then there's one called Rape Board.

People need to wake the fuck up and stop acting like libertarians, defending anything and everything that can possibly be fapped to.

Stop insisting that anti porn people explain themselves, and deal with reality. We aren't the threat.

What are you talking about? It isn't hate speech that is considered a crime or enhances a crime, but actions inspired by hate that carry stiffer penalties than actions inspired by say greed.

I thought for a moment I lived in a society that abhors hate & bullying, then I put down the bong & came back to reality.

can i go into colorado now and get some, or the feds gonna get me. i havent been paying attention

oh oh, and my son is being recruited by a couple colleges in colorado.

oh oh oh, and i get to drive him in a couple months from now to check out colleges.

he is old and staid, me? i like to play. lol. and i dont have parents around



cute post

CU Boulder is gorgeous! Stunningly beautiful campus.

I'm not sure how the new law is going to work. I've read that CO's medical MJ program is modeled differently than CA's & that's one reason CO didn't have as much issue with the DOJ, but I don't know all the details.

I remember when Arnold Schwarzenegger defended MJ & stated, "It is a leaf!" A few days after that I was at the natural grocers & grabbed a few boxes for moving & one of the boxes had the logo, "Trust the Leaf" on it & I

Yeah, you come to CO & we'll have fun!

People don't read. They don't listen.

They do the hair on fire OMGZ OH NOOOO! DON'T TAKE AWAY THE PORRNNNNN!!!1!11 dunbass bullshit.

Even Shelley fucking Lubben just wants some goddamn protections for women for fuck's sake.

Fucking idiocy.

then the poster comes in and tells us it is our fault.

hmmmmmmm

What type of erotica do you not oppose? That video you posted below (#46), are you saying representative of porn? Because if you are, it seems to imply that you want to ban.

Okay, so if you're not talking about banning, what do you mean? Can you describe any conceivable video of heterosexual erotica with complete nudity that you would find acceptable? Acceptable being, not obscene, licit, legal?

Last edited Sat Jan 5, 2013, 10:46 PM - Edit history (1)

about something else and did not realize i was talking about a video on FB showing a gang rape of a kidnapped girl.

It objectifies men so that should be equally considered and included.

Find some footage of gay male porn stars being raped, then we will talk.

Thought it was in general, disregard

Thanks for not flipping out about the fact that this is a protected group... I'm slightly stunned.

not the same. heterosexual male porn is about the domination and submission of women in order to get off on cause men really cant get off otherwise, or so the porn makers literally say.

before I answer!

not

and a newbie at that. not impressed.

I am not in your target demographic.

Someone who
A. Wants to ban porn
B. For one reason: Objectification

Which makes this... still more tiresome flamebait trollery.

Yet they think they are so clever with their boring, tedious same-shit-different-day nonsense.

You can want to ban pornography for an endless number of reasons and my post still holds up. I've seen people advocating banning pornography on DU before.

so you tell me.

It doesn't change the substance of my post, which you apparently agreed with so what is the problem?

that could be any worse than what is out there now.

Wasting energy battling strawman arguments about banning porn ... what is the point?

Tell me how a black market could be worse. The most popular porn site in the world is a cam site, on which you can pay desperate women in many countries to do whatever you want, at your command. Abuse and rape sites are great business

But all we see are hair on fire theatrics about the horrible threat of losing access to teh pron. It is beyond sickening.

We need to see a lot more acknowledgment of what is out there, and no more libertarian kneejerking defensiveness of why nobody should ever dare think of banning teh pron! Oh my goodness no! Things would only get worse! An argument, by the way, that women are well used to. Usually in the form of: 'If you take away porn more women will get raped!' No implicit threat there, and no selling men out as uncontrollable, irredeemable werewolves of violent sexual appetites. And now we get assholes claiming 'If we only let them watch simulated child porn, they'd surely stop raping so many kids. So let's try that!' Society is sick and getting sicker. It is past time to stop acting as if rape culture is inevitable.

at the lack of restrictions on the net to control rapes and sex slavery for a man to jack off to for entertainment says fuckin a whole hell of a lot.

what human being would not trip over the fact that maybe a person is being abused and hurt so they could get off.

where would that entertainment value come in with consideration that maybe the woman is held against her will, forced to do things she does not want ot do, being hurt.

what human being would not even blink at that consideration.

damn i am blessed having a hubby that not only took an interest, read up on it but shared the info with me and two sons.... making clear his feeling on the abuse of other human beings.

-- that the lack of porn will lead to more sexual assault that horrifies me the most. Don't these people even understand the implications of that if it were true?

But I'm a kneejerking libertarian if I say we shouldn't? I still fail to see what I did wrong.

"Tell me how a black market could be worse." same reason the black market of prohibition is worse than the regulated alcohol industry we have now. You take the money out of the hands of businessman and give it to criminals. Giving criminals a lot of money tends to have a bad effect on society (see the current drug fuelled conflicts)

has no rules and regulation and the criminal org is already in place making the money of the women and children,.... where would the balck market come in with a sex slave trade entertaining you already???

i mean. the only conclusion, after all the posts to you, for you to go into this, that you refuse to not only listen, but not consider.

so why should any woman on this forum put in the time and effort into discussion

As far as I've seen you haven't purposed any, so how am I not listening if you're not speaking?

women, and children to do horrible things so someone can make a buck off them? really.... think this one thru.

my hubby had a really good suggestion. that trash would NOT come into our house and we would NOT support the abuse of anyone. stop.... the end. of the fuckin story.

we cannot know WHO is being abused, forced, raped, held captive.

not gonna be a part of it.

supply and demand bubba.

Or to make porn with children in it period?

I do agree we need to do a much better job of enforcing those laws.

conversation with you.

we are talking about a very real, horrific issue with women and children. and your cavalier attitude disgusts me. i cannot make that any more clear. your dismissal of very real pain to other human beings. absolutely not a single interest in reflecting where our world is today, what human beings are being put thru so you and others can get off.

How is that dismissive or a cavalier attitude about the victims pain?

By the way, I'm a gay man. I've never bought the kind of porn you're talking about. Hell I've never bought porn in the first place. So I really wish you'd stop trying to make this personal.

any laws, catch them, stop them.

human beings are suffering. and will continue to suffer. this porn is just feeding, enticing, growing the demand. and it is being taken out on the women and children.

it is not something so simple of enforcement.

the net. how do you catch them

a rape, on facebook. how can they catch them?

they cant

And as individual we need to be sure to not financially contribute to that suffering. I certainly never have and I will continue to not to.

Beyond that I don't know. What I'm saying is that banning porn won't help either (not that I am implying you are calling for that, but that was the point of my original post).

ok.

i have never seen anyone on du, in all the years i have been on du, advocate the banning.

we pretty much know that is not the answer.

so i think all about agree with you on that.

we may not see much of a difference though, whether it is banned or not.

It basically just gave women harmed in the making in pornography, or who could demonstrate harm from porn in the workplace or that was clearly involved in motivating a crime (like the little Asian girl who was hanged in Chapel Hill right after the Penthouse issue of Asian women hanging from trees came out) a chance to sue the pornographers.

Now, a person who spills hot coffee on themselves from mcDonalds gets to sue them for hundreds of thousands of dollars, but a person coerced into making porn can't even get an injunction to get her filmed rape out of production because it's "protected speech," let alone sue the bastards.

If I recall, Linda Lovelace's pimp turned around and tried to sue her for her book that criticized him as a batterer who raped her and forced her into pornography.

There's been a long debate on this, but an accessible first start for guys might be stuff written by Robert Jensen, a professor of journalism at UT Austin.

Also, Playboy and the regulated pornographers have a responsibility to out the monsters who make the other crap, but since the internet traffickers basically are already scum mafia gangland types who'd rape and torture and even kill so they and others can get off, they're not going to be amenable to persuasion. Plus, they're already breaking laws, so new laws aren't going to matter much to them. We need to prosecute the current offenders.

Dworkin and MacKinnon wanted to hit the pornographers in their pocketbooks, and empower their former victims to be the ones bringing cases against them in civil court rather than the state do it on their behalf.

Hope this helps, and I'm glad you're taking the issue of pornography seriously enough to visit this forum to learn more about it. That's more than many people do.

Why would those laws only be extended to rape? If someone produces something that "inspires" someone to commit a violent crime should they be held liable? If an author depicts a way of murdering someone in a novel and a reader kills someone in that manner, are they then liable for that murder?

It seems to me like you would end up with is a society where it is illegal to depict anything illegal.

If it is good for rape, why isn't it good for murder?

just not gonna go over well.

even in your innocence.

That doesn't mean I believe you should be able to sue someone for "inspiring" a rape any more than you should be able to sue someone for "inspiring" a murder. A content producer should never be held responsible for what people who consume their content do, because they can't control it.

If someone watched the Silence of the Lambs and then chopped up and ate their neighbours, should the victim's family be able to sue Thomas Harris?

it is no more significant when it comes to entertainment for a man to jack off to, is a little too frivolous for this forum. i am telling you, we really do not want to hear how being entertained by rape to get off on has no consequence and even if it does.... meh.

are you getting it?

"inspiring" crimes of any kind by creating fiction. So unless I did all that by simply disagreeing with you then I don't know where you got a word of that from.

You're free to quote me and prove me wrong.

being grabbed on the side of the road. 7 minutes of the males fuzzed out so they could not be identified. the pain and the fear and the disgust of the girl being raped for fuckin 7 minutes on facebook. not a fuckin piece of evidence that the girl was not being raped for a fuckin 7 minutes as she curled into a ball after two men raped her repeatedly and another man filmed her making sure their ugly ass face never made it onto the camera, so you fuckin men could fuckin get off.

and what was fuckin said by duers.....

oh

simulation rape

wasnt real.

so fuck that fuckin fiction. no one knows if we watched a girl get raped or if it was MERE entertainment. but, we dismissed it so very fuckin easily as JUST entertainment.

now... do you GET YET why we do not want to hear this cutsey little sugar coating of your fuckin rape enter FUCKIN tainment.

Any rape anywhere should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. I'd be perfectly fine with a law that bans videos of rapes if the victim or their family (if the victim isn't able to) requests it.

Because I'm really not getting it.

the victim does not know it is on facebook. the relatives do not know. the cops may??? see it but do not know if it is real.

now.... i tell you about a horrific 7 minutes that i watched. that is to ENTERTAIN men. so they can get off. a disgusting 7 minutes. and how people on du dismissed it as fake, without a clue. how easily it is to shrug rape off.

if this is rape, nothing will happen. and all the people that watched were voyeurs to a girls rape.

that is it

that is all it amounts to. that is as far as it goes.

what does it say about us as people?

read this.

http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~rjensen/freelance/pornography&cruelty.htm

it isnt too long.

and then watch this.

they will not allow it to sink in. think beyond the shallowest of answers. they do not allow themselves to feel the experience.

and yes

it is because of just what you say.


about men’s cruelty to women, and the pleasure men sometimes take in that cruelty.

I like to know what I'm talking about.

I saw the '18 and Abused' site linked from some other site.

Tellingly, Googling 18 and Abused nets a cornucopia of hateful violent porn sites, but I didn't find any actual abuse treatment or outreach links.

But I was already fully aware there is terrible pornography out there with a terrible message. There are also terrible books out there with equally terrible messages. There are political manifestos that call for the murder of entire races and some of them have had dire effects on people including my own (I'm jewish). Even the most ugly and disgusting protected speech is still protected speech. The rights that allow them to publish their filth are the same rights that keep minority voices of all kinds from being utterly squashed

And pornography is protected speech. I do not support legislation designed to curtail protected speech either through direct (outright bans) or secondary ways (Legislation that would result in pornographers being sued out of existence, which is a de facto ban).

I'm sorry if that is an unsatisfactory answer, but that is the position I hold. I can be disgusted by words but still say a person has an unabridgeable right to speak them. Crimes that are committed in the creation of pornography should be punished to the fullest extent of the laws, but the crime is the crimes themselves not the porn.

away from the legality of it and freedom of speech argument since we have already established not a single person on du is advocating making porn illegal.

i asked, after reading that article of what is done to women, and after watching the video of what was done to the woman..... what did you FEEL.

the thing. my 14 yr old nephew was caught looking at porn. had found a site and been using the site about 4 months. in conversation after the fact, he said he was glad he was caught. he hated it. he hated how it made him feel. he hated that even though he said he would look at it no more, to himself, he found himself going to the site over and over. he said, that it made him sick afterward. that he felt like crap looking at these women and young girls, and what the whole feel of it was.

he was glad he was caught. he was glad when there were parental restrictions. he was glad that it was no longer a part of his life and he didnt feel the compulsion to go to it anymore.

he probably had a very good life lesson that will swerve him well, because he understands the unhealthy pull he was feeling.

why is a boy able to express how he felt with the experience, but grown adults refuse to put themselves in another shoes and feel ....

anyway. this is not the healthiest of subjects for me. i think i am about done with it.

but, if you felt anything even comparable to what women feel, when we read about the degradation these women experience, you will have a LITTLE of a clue what our issue is.

it isnt legality

But again, people have a unabridgeable right to consume as much disgusting content as they desire in the privacy of their own home and content producers have an equal right to produce it (provided they violated no laws of course).

In a debate like this the absolute worst thing a person can do is let their emotional side overcome their rational side. Sorry, my feelings about pornographers are inconsequential in the face of it's status of protect speech.

It is one of the strongest ones there is.

Associating violence against with women with that reward has consequences.

Hate speech is still protected speech and so is pornography.

Should a victim of rape have the right to remove a video of that rape from the market. You're damn right they should.

Should all depictions of rape play (Yes this is horrible term, but that is what it is called don't shoot the messenger) for the purpose of sexually gratify a viewer be illegal to sell and distribute? Maybe, my gut says yes, but I also think that this could be considered protected speech like other forms of horrible pornography.

Should all fictional depictions of rape be illegal in all media? Even if the intent behind the depiction is clearly not for sexual purposes? I believe absolutely not. Rape in our society does happen and artists have a right to include it in their story, especially if the intent behind the inclusion is not sexual gratification.

Images of violence against women created for the specific purpose of arousing someone to orgasm.

Since you think it should be legal I have nothing further to discuss with you.

Did you even read my post?

"Maybe, my gut says yes, but I also think that this could be considered protected speech like other forms of horrible pornography."

Then a yes

Then a rationalization for a yes.

Sorry, but I am really not interested in discussing this issue further with you.

It was a maybe, followed by gut saying that we should, followed by a counter argument to my gut that says it might be considered protected speech.

In the context of the question "Should we ban it" a yes would mean ban it, which was the one I was addressing. I know you asked if it should be legal, but in my mind I rephrased it while considering it. I'm sure you'd agree the essential meaning of the question remained the same.

Feel free to discontinue this conversation at your leisure, this is a free discussion board and you can respond or not respond to anyone you want to.

Thank you for posting. Bookmarking it for future reference.


on edit: The other poster clearly did not read Jensen's commentary.

Oh sorry, no, the issues are just completely ignored... And its any objections to the $13 billion industry that are treated like a joke.

Shameful.

That immersed himself in pornography and wrote about it right? He was kinda horrified.

Why does so much porn involve what a 'consenting' adult would consider humiliation, degradation and pain?

that report you had in the other thread. from the little i read in the subthread, it is exactly what i am seeing happening with all this. and why did you delete your Op. i was saving it for tomorrow.

i have been busy in a couple other places today.

Can only be changed. Right now, if I look at porn sites I see too much what would pass for pedophilia. Pornography is misogynist, racist and occasionally dangerous; and as I said in another post, surprisingly non-erotic.

The practical solution is out of reach, because it need gestalt, a resolution of number of women's issues on the table, equal pay, proper child care, full reproductive rights, the end of rape culture, equal representation in government office, in positions of authority etc.--- you get the picture.
The problem with porn is not videos of sexual acts, it's that those act become representative of what women are.

How do we change it? One mind at a time. One image at a time. Pornography steals sexual imagination and replaces it with false imagery, the fullness and intenseness of the erotic gets lost in spoon feed corporate sex. Education will help. Women and male allies speaking out. If someone is a pornography consumer, demand erotic, reciprocal images rather than the dominance plays we see today. Know the difference between participating in SMBD, and watching it vicariously ( I'm not saying don't watch it, I'm saying educate oneself) refuse to watch depictions of rape. Refuse to watch anything that indicates the under-aged (that would take out a whole lot of porn right there) refuse to watch racist porn. The consumer really has the power to change the dynamic of pornagraphy, but the consumer has been indoctrinated in images of one type of another since birth.



there is NO getting away from the pornification of women



As I also said in another post, what's erotic is subjective. Historically, women's sexuality has been degraded or repressed. And we are talking millennia. We're not going to fix the problems of pornography quickly.

If you want to change the porn you need to change the society.

I say that is absolute bullshit.

It's everywhere. It was at the Olympic Games. The post I had to self delete because it wouldn't link properly was a great piece on the pornification of women in politics. Its in in what we consider our greatest literature ( I despise Hemingway). It's ingrained in our media. Music. Art.

It's not that we don't have strong voices speaking out against it, trying to change it, but the fact that its everywhere we look. We become numb, some of us, we accept it as normal.

Everywhere.

I walk out the door to work, it's there in the strip club close to the stadium we drive past on my way to work. The small barista stands where half naked women serve breasts and coffee. I have sick patients who are comforted when someone takes the time to shave their legs.

I'm not saying don't fight, or it can't be changed, I'm saying that is everywhere you look.

No, there is no way to get away from it, living in todays society ... But in time we can, provided we destroy the patriarchy.

From the ground up and then salt the earth so it doesn't grow back

"just because you ban something doesn't mean it stops to exist..."

All ethical considerations aside, is the corollary also true: Just because a thing exists is a reason to allow it?