Pornography

[Joves]

Especially given the laws in the UK where they are considering outlawing unacceptable pornography without determining what unacceptable is.

People have fetishes. Let sleeping dogs lie I say.

Well the US courts are just as ambiguous on the matter. It is still defined as they dont know what is obscene/pornograpic but they will know it when they see it. The problem has always been defining it to suit everyone. It will never happen.

 

[Senor Hound]

Well the US courts are just as ambiguous on the matter. It is still defined as they dont know what is obscene/pornograpic but they will know it when they see it. The problem has always been defining it to suit everyone. It will never happen.

Especially as long as Larry Flynt and Pat Robertson are both American citizens...lol

BTW, I find the term "acceptable" and "obscene" to be quite comical. Obviously the content is acceptable and not obscene to someone, or they WOULDN'T BE MAKING IT! So who is it unacceptable and obscene to? A board of nine crotchety old former lawyers in Washington DC? That doesn't seem very representative of our society...

 

[Onion]

Especially as long as Larry Flynt and Pat Robertson are both American citizens...lol

BTW, I find the term "acceptable" and "obscene" to be quite comical. Obviously the content is acceptable and not obscene to someone, or they WOULDN'T BE MAKING IT! So who is it unacceptable and obscene to? A board of nine crotchety old former lawyers in Washington DC? That doesn't seem very representative of our society...

aceptable is when the girl is good looking. oscene is when the guy is good looking.

 

[Battou]

aceptable is when the girl is good looking. oscene is when the guy is good looking.

oscene is when they are both looking.....at you

 

[Samriel]

Seriously, though, the way the world looks at sex is hilarious. We have mainstream movies of people who get their heads ripped into with chainsaws (Scarface, and about a million horror flicks), yet scenes which show penetration or any other sexual act (things 99% of us actually will do in our lifetime), even artistically are labeled as smut.

There is a very sound reason for this. Very few people will watch Scarface and get out and start rampaging with a chainsaw. Too few of us live in enviroments where this could be thought of nearly tolerable. Violence is more or less clearly defined as bad in most cultures. But with sexual acts, especially as seen in mainstream pornography, it's a different story. Nobody says sex is bad, nor can this be said for biological reasons. The education in this area is lacking, so many take pornography for a teacher. Many watch it and try, or would like to try, to do such things in their own real lives. Since pornography is mostly about the male fantasy, it shouldn't come as a wonder that females are not always happy about what males want of them. Sure, you can dream of your ten slave girls, but don't try to treat your partner as one - or so many people think. I rather see the whole thing as a problem of the sexual stereotype where the industry has been allowed the role of the educator - many women don't necesserely like that men think of certain sexual acts and procedures as "normal" or "mustdo"s. On the other hand, lately many men don't seem to like that society seems to thinks that they are supposed to start the flirt, invite to dinner, pay the dinner, have a car, be stronger etc. In families where the sexual education has been properly done (as is mostly the case with education concerning violence), there are much less problems with pornography or relations with the other sex.

To swing it back to photography, I think that pornogaphic photography is nothing to be ashamed of, and can be something to explore both the photographers sexuality and the sexuality of the model. It is of course mostly there to stimulate the viewer and sell in as many copies as possible. Sadly, it is also mostly made by men - would there be more women pornographers men might actually learn more useful things than just how to enjoy themselves.

 

[Battou]

The education in this area is lacking, so many take pornography for a teacher.

This one of the problems with the world today, not just with pornography but violence as well. A kid plays GTA 3 and then goes out and shoots up his school...everyone blames the game, teenage pregnancy skyrockets everyone blames the porn industry....NO. It's the lack of education that is to blame. Humans are naturally curious....they will learn something either in school or threw exparimentation. In cases of extream violence or sexuality there are implications and rammifications that some one is not doing an adiquate job of informing todays youth about.

 

[Senor Hound]

This one of the problems with the world today, not just with pornography but violence as well. A kid plays GAT 3 and then goes out and shoots up his school...everyone blames the game, teenage pregnancy skyrockets everyone blames the porn industry....NO. It's the lack of education that is to blame. Humans are naturally curious....they will learn something either in school or threw exparimentation. In cases of extream violence or sexuality there are implications and rammifications that some one is not doing an adiquate job of informing todays youth about.

WOOT WOOT!!! I love this post. You get a gold star! Except people have moved on to GTA4 now

And whoever said that something about violence being more foreign to us than sex, and therefore acceptable to imitate makes no sense. I just don't get that concept at all. I will NEVER get how an 18 year old woman in a sexual pose (or even having sex with a guy OR girl) is somehow more obscene then a simulated chainsaw to the brain. And if violence is somehow easier to detach from than sex, IMO its only because of the way our society is constructed. I can honestly say for me, it isn't. I can watch a porn and not put myself in the position of the male star (no pun intended) a lot easier than I can not put myself in the position of someone getting shot in the head. Violence is extremely vivid, to the point that it gives me nightmares. So maybe that's why I feel this way.

Maybe if people's sexualities were more out in the open and not seen as a "naughty act," Then perhaps people wouldn't develop such thoughts about it (MAYBE). Maybe if our advertisements showed women with bare bodies, there wouldn't be as many privacy-invading voyeurs (MAYBE). Maybe if our society was able to talk about our society's sexual habits in an open and friendly manner, even with people of a younger age (but who understand what sex is), there wouldn't be as many people who feel the need to look at pornography as a learning tool instead of as something fun to experience.(MAYBE).

So far the only argument that I've thought held water was that violence is simulated, while pornography is, well, quite obviously not. That gives most sex videos an intensity violent videos don't have, but even implied sex freaks people out.


BTW, Pornography is just as degrading to men as it is to women. Both sexes are promoted to do and act in ways that are unnatural. Its being used as a learning tool when it shouldn't be.

 

[Battou]

WOOT WOOT!!! I love this post. You get a gold star! Except people have moved on to GTA4 now

Oh....I don't play any of them so I did not know that one.....I stick to my War games....

 

[Jedo_03]

errm... Most porn is so retouched that it's nothing like the original photos.

Ummm - yeah,,, would agree... some of those porno models have been retouched and retouched and retouched so many times that it's nothing like how it was originally...
Jedo

 

[Jedo_03]

Especially given the laws in the UK where they are considering outlawing unacceptable pornography without determining what unacceptable is.

People have fetishes. Let sleeping dogs lie I say.

Garbz: - Are you saying that your fetish is connected to sleeping dogs..
Don't ban me - I'm only joking...
Jedo

 

[Battou]

Ummm - yeah,,, would agree... some of those porno models have been retouched and retouched and retouched so many times that it's nothing like how it was originally...
Jedo

No they haven't :lmao:

 

[O'Rork]

Apparently your mother doesn't care much for grammar, as you just horribly misused the word "denotative," which means absolutely nothing related to what you think it does.

Ridiculous logic anyway. Or at least ridiculous moral standards. Should one not be allowed to photograph their significant other nude or semi nude because they wouldn't want to show it to their mother?

It's my understanding that "denotative connotations" means it sounds bad...

Ridiculous moral standards? You crack me up. You wanna take naked pics of your SO, fine. That's a very long way from my definition of porn.
Would you take a snap of your SO with your genitalia in their mouth and show that to your mom?

Are you twisted?

 

[Jedo_03]

Photography forum...
Yet mention the word PORN and you get 40 posts in 36 hours...
Bugger-all really about technical quality / composition / lighting / exposure
So someone like Henson takes HQ photos of little girls, studied composition and featured lighting, full-frame sensor, and it's suddenly NOT porn...
It's ART...
Kalvin Klein made his million$ in advertising - "exploiting" the notion of sexuality in underwear...
Pornographers make their million$ in exploiting the notion of sexuality...
What do you think Henson is doing..?
Is he exploiting little girls for a profit?
Is he exploring the concept of 'art for arts sake' (artis gratis)?
Is he pushing the boundaries..? Why..?
There are many questions...
Jedo

 

[Miaow]

I'm hoping this is a stimulating subject...

I'm sure it is to those that like it

Ok for an artistic view, in my opinion and I'm female, some soft core images can, if done nicely, have a reasonable artistic quality to them. Hard Core is not artistic at all.

 

[Alpha]

I'll say again, there is no compelling reason to prohibit a photograph of two consenting subjects having sex.