It's May 13, 2024, 01:27:06 AM
How is regular pornography humiliation and degradation of women? I'm serious, I don't understand why people feel this way. Of course there are types of porn that obviously are that way, but I never, ever was able to understand how normal porn in principle is considered to be just that.
Quote from: 7even on August 15, 2008, 05:43:27 AMHow is regular pornography humiliation and degradation of women? I'm serious, I don't understand why people feel this way. Of course there are types of porn that obviously are that way, but I never, ever was able to understand how normal porn in principle is considered to be just that.becuz it seriously is just that. i mean what else are the women who perform in pornographical videos or photos? they are simply sex objects. nobody who is sane and realizes that women are humanbeings can be in favour of that. these women are used, most of them are too naive, in need of money or/and ignorant to realize that aint that reason enough to be against pornography?-for me it is
The example he uses about sweat shops displays just how irrational and fanciful Chomsky's idea's are. He says that the answer is too "eliminate the conditions (such as poverty) that drive women into pornography or sweatshops". Well, nobody has ever been able to wave a magic wand and eliminate poverty, so we have to deal with life as it is. And if you are a starving woman in Thailand and you have a choice between pornography and working in a sweat shop or starving to death... then NOAM CHOMSKY is not God, and he can not tell you that you have to starve to death and that sweat shops and pornography should be illegal.... as a Libertarian I believe that it should be up to the individual to make whichever decision is most beneficial to them.. regardless of what Noam Chomsky thinks.
excuse me, but yes youre wrong*being used for something wasnt meant as being used in generalbut being used for very low reasons:those are:a) putting men socially and culturally on a highler level: as someone who has controlover the woman.Well, first it has to be said that the directors of porn are often women, even. And even if you put all the control that women sometimes have aside, it is still normal that the boss has control over the one who is employed. That's just how things work. b) gaining unbelievable sums of money by pornographical businessessome of which enslave women and teenagers(underaged people that is) and which partly go into human trade in order to keep up with the rivalcompanies AGAIN, I do not deny that there are niches in the sex business that are completely fucked up. What has that to do with decent porn, though? It's like wanting to prohibit soccer and basketball, because some activities that are considered "sport" can be messed up. There's always this issue with where to draw the line, but that's a general tension with everything in life and porn is not special in that regard.c)not use but ABUSE the naivity, ignorance and poverty of people How so? If a woman is fine with having sex on camera and getting paid for it, what is the problem? Do you feel like Jenna Jameson had been abused, because she was so naive, ignorant and poor and so she got hella rich and influential in the process of her abuse? Just because having sex on camera for money is nothing you would consider, that doesn't mean every rational woman has to think like that. *dont give me that off-topic bullshit about women not having any free willas if it had anything to do with free will. pornography of the kind i gave you an example of promotes an image of women who dont need any free will, whoSHOULD NOT have anything like a WILL. the woman is degraded to a sex-objectis an object to have any will?You're reaching here, as in taking the term "object" too technical. AGAIN, yes there is porn in which the women are not supposed to be willing to do what they do. But in many types of porn, part of the porn is that the women (pretend to) enjoy the sex and interact with the camera/the viewer.*I didnt say "women are seen as sex objects" i said, women are used in pornography tobe objects of sexual arousement, which, im sorry, i cant be in favour of. i understandthat i cant change that development in our society. but i would never want to support it.thats my point.So would you rather live in a society in which sex is considered something evil, and in which one has to repress his or hers natural and healthy sexual feelings and desires in order to be accepted?of course sex is natural, committing crimes and violence is also natural to the human kind, does it meanwe should support videos of violence and of murder? beucz you know they are also kinda cooland give some people a feeling of satisfaction.Sorry, but this is just as stupid as this Chomsky guy comparing regular western porn to child abuse. How are videos of a porn star willingly having sex on camera even remotely comparable to illegal violence and murder? It's not, don't pretend that it is.tell me how interacting with the camera makes a woman seem as if she is worshipped or in control of anythingyou can make a child in a child pornography interact with the cam too, if you want to.what is rather interesting is that the men are not even shown mostly, you can only hear theirsighs, moans and "i will fuck you till you scream"-talk. so who is humiliated here?I'm not even getting into that child bs. But like I said, I'd never deny that "wrong" porn that is humiliating exists. I'm just saying that normal pornography in principle is not like that.and i can tell you damn straight that pornography and its repercussions on our society nowadaysis so heavy that such stupid prohibitions are made.
You also make it look like it was a ghetto thing. Like only women who are completely lost and are destined to die with no other option left would consider doing porn. That is, with all due respect, completely delusional. Not all women are like you (want to be), get over it.
He says that the answer is too "eliminate the conditions (such as poverty) that drive women into pornography or sweatshops". Well, nobody has ever been able to wave a magic wand and eliminate poverty, so we have to deal with life as it is. And if you are a starving woman in Thailand and you have a choice between pornography and working in a sweat shop or starving to death... then NOAM CHOMSKY is not God, and he can not tell you that you have to starve to death and that sweat shops and pornography should be illegal.... as a Libertarian I believe that it should be up to the individual to make whichever decision is most beneficial to them.. regardless of what Noam Chomsky thinks.
That is, with all due respect, completely delusional. Not all women are like you (want to be), get over it.