nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Pornography is discriminating?

I'd like to know what lies behind the arguement that pornography is discrimination of women. How have feminists come to this conclusion?
And what about the men in pornography? Are men also being discriminated?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

If anything it is the men that are victims of this as they get paid far less.

Wasn't this whole thing discussed a few months back? Do a search. This board isn't here for your basic education tbh.

simu wrote:

Wasn't this whole thing discussed a few months back? Do a search. This board isn't here for your basic education tbh.

It seems that a search returns a similar subject was discussed some 7 months back. I have also taken the time to read the charter, and have not found a section marked Subjects less than 7 months old should not be discussed. I did, however, see a section on trolling, flaming and being stupid. Maybe you should have a read of it, and not be so fuking rude in your answers.

Chill!

I'm very chilled. Thank you.

Here it is. How's that for helpful, huh?

simu wrote:

Here it is. How's that for helpful, huh?

No. I had already pointed out that a thread had been posted about this 7 months ago. What exactly is your probelm here?

Hobart wrote:

No. I had already pointed out that a thread had been posted about this 7 months ago. What exactly is your probelm here?

Well, I didn't think Vangelis would get much of a response to this thread given that many regular posters on here discussed the effects of porn in a fair amount of detail in that older thread and might not feel like repeating themselves.

simu wrote:

Well, I didn't think Vangelis would get much of a response to this thread given that many regular posters on here discussed the effects of porn in a fair amount of detail in that older thread and might not feel like repeating themselves.

Last time I looked I did not see your name at the bottom of the board as a mod. Maybe you should leave the moderation, to the mods? I presume you reported the OP for having the timerity to post without having checked what exactly was posted over the last seven months? I guess so.

Well thank God we have you then, the champion of the "regular poster". Ridding in on her trusty steed to save the over exhausted "regular poster" from the boredom of repeating themselves. How did we ever cope without you. Go back to your comics, why don't you?

Discriminating? That doesn't really make sense

. Do you mean exploiting? Degrading perhaps?

I suppose it's only natural that (male-centric) pornography would portray women as objects - men don't watch porn for mental stimulation or to find out about the featured women's personalities. We watch it for tits and ass, not to put too fine a point on it.

If you watch female-produced porn (produced for females that is; female-produced male-centric porn is about the same as male-produced) you'll find a lot more 'character development' (lol?) and maybe a bit of plot, because women (generally, not a rule) tend to be more stimulated by imagination than the in-your-face graphic action preferred by blokes. I don't think you'll find many women into bukkake porn! :eek:

Real lesbian porn is boring

Hobart wrote:

Maybe you should leave the moderation, to the mods?

If you saw litter all over the place in front of your house, would you just leave it to the binmen to clean up?

Sico wrote:

If you saw litter all over the place in front of your house, would you just leave it to the binmen to clean up?

No, the street cleaners. But enough of these interesting analagies. Back to the subject at hand.

I think a lot of comes from theories around the male gaze and representations of women in art and media ranging from mainstream to high art to porn. So this is how women have come to be "objectified" as the widely held assumption for so long is that men are more visual. Porn has changed and while still mostly profiting from a male driven market they are also making porn for women, both lesbian and hetero and this has been a growing market.

If you notice, men are becoming just as scrutinised by the female gaze as women are by men. There is more pressure on them to be fit, to wax their hair and to be well groomed. As porn has changed so has feminist perspectives on it.

The challenge to this debate is first agreeing on what you call pornography. And then deciding if it is discriminatory against women.

Good luck!

Simu, that's flaming.

Warning, warning.

Sico wrote:

I don't think you'll find many women into bukkake porn! :eek:

Pity, isn´t it

Well arent you ment to give you opinions not just post random questions?
and shouldn't they be your own opinions and not vast tracts of 'research' from else where ?

Feminsts didn't aruge that is was discriminating but that it was degrading.
It still for the most cases portray very idealised images of what a woman is ment to look at.

Wether or not the work pratices in the pornography industry discrininate against
either gender you would have to do some research.

You can't lump all feminists in together either. There's a whole spectrum of feminist views on pornography. Brief discussion here

simu wrote:

You can't lump all feminists in together either. There's a whole spectrum of feminist views on pornography. Brief discussion here

I don't see any discussion there. Simply a wiki article, with references for clarification, am I missing something?

Well considering that Jenna Jameson is a billionaire I'm not going to feel too bad for being degraded.
The women have a hard to achieve body ideal and are paid accordingly.

Allright I've had it! In the beginning I was criticised and verbally mauled by posters here for creating a thread, asking questions and then having my own opinions/answers to those questions. People didn't want that. They wanted to feed me with their own answers. I was not allowed to have my own opinion. What was the point with making a thread then?

Now! I need to have answers of my own. I refuse to be harrassed for not having answers to my questions this time.

Make up your minds!!!!!! :mad:

I don't like porn, I think it's impure, but I want to familiarise myself with what the different opinions are as to whether is discriminating or not.

Post a question. Give your opinion. Argue it if necessary.

If you're not strong enough in your convinctions to post them and face criticisms then maybe you shouldn't post.

Sangre wrote:

Well considering that Jenna Jameson is a billionaire.

Sweeping, unsubstatiated statement. Can you back this up please?
Bank account details, home phone number, address etc.

Sangre wrote:

Post a question. Give your opinion. Argue it if necessary.

If you're not strong enough in your convinctions to post them and face criticisms then maybe you shouldn't post.

I cannot post my opinions, which are all based on the Bible.
Christian views are not welcome in a Humanistic forum.

Hagar wrote:

Sweeping, unsubstatiated statement. Can you back this up please?
Bank account details, home phone number, address etc.

Contact details for Sangre or for Jenna?

Well Vangelis , from what I've noticed over your past few threads is that you either (a) start a topic and make your views known , and when someone crticises them you keep asking more random questions straying further from the original topic.
or (b) Just bring up a topic and ask for other peoples opinions ( as in this thread ) without giving your own. You expect to be educated from this thread but this isnt what the humanities forum is about.

Vangelis wrote:

I cannot post my opinions, which are all based on the Bible.
Christian views are not welcome in a Humanistic forum.

This forum is only called humanities - you certainly don't have to be a professed humanist to post in them. You can say you stick to the Bible's views on pornography if you want but possibly, others won't agree with it but that's life.

Me, I don't think porn is bad per se - it depends on the implementation. You could have porn films where people are raped and so on which would obviously be abusive but you could also have porn where people were enjoying themselves freely and expressing their sexuality too and personally, I don't see the harm in the latter type. I gather anti-porn feminists focused more on the first type. Andrea Dworkin, for example. But I think her views are more a reflection of gender relations in her time and that they become less relevant as men and women begin to have more equality.

Vangelis, I was just wondering and I don't mean to be offensive I'm genuinely curious, are you aspergers or a.d.d?
<edit> I would have asked in the psychology forum but I know you can't respond there.

Vangelis wrote:

I don't like porn, I think it's impure, but I want to familiarise myself with what the different opinions are as to whether is discriminating or not.

It is abit of why should we share our views if you won't share yours I guess.
I do respect your christain point of view on this and the fact you are looking for toher opinions. but I am confused by what you mean by the term discriminating

discriminating

adj 1: showing or indicating careful judgment and discernment especially in matters of taste; "the discriminating eye of the connoisseur" [ant: undiscriminating]
2: marked by the ability to see or make fine distinctions; "discriminate judgments"; "discriminate people" [syn: discriminate] [ant: indiscriminate]
3: having or demonstrating ability to recognize or draw fine distinctions; "an acute observer of politics and politicians"; "incisive comments"; "icy knifelike reasoning"; "as sharp and incisive as the stroke of a fang"; "penetrating insight"; "frequent penetrative observations" [syn: acute, incisive, keen, knifelike, penetrating, penetrative, piercing, sharp]

definations take from http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discriminating

I believe Vangelis is from another country and English may not be her first language. I think that might explain the usage of the word discriminating. I presume she meant degrading. I could be wrong though.

Just google Jenna Jameson billionaire. Think shes a dollar billionaire. Thought there was only 3 sterling female billionaires (oprah, marta and jk rowling). Not sure though.