Whats the point of Pornography!?

[Scout]

Im not saying that you arent entitles to your morals, but you cannot debate morals, its moot.

 

I think that's a debatable statement, in itself. But at any rate, what we were actually debating (I thought, anyway) was that porn actors, because of the very nature of their work, have an increased risk of getting STDs. Not the moral question of porn.

 

But it IS a safe, regulated workplace, just as much as any other industry. More people are harmed in carpentery and in the army...

 

Again, we're discussing the increased risk of STDs because of the very nature of porn work, not the general safety of the various workplaces of other professions.

 

However, if you'd like to make a comparison - at least in the construction/carpentry business, workers are required to wear hard hats, safety belts, and other apparatus to protect themselves. The military wears armor, drives in armored cars, carry weapons to protect themselves. The porn industry, for the most part, does not allow actors to protect themselves from getting STDs by wearing condoms, the second most effective way after abstinence to prevent the spread of STDs. That is why there have been outbreaks of AIDs in the past among porn actors, and why there likely will be again.

 

I take a rather bitter view on people trying to tell others they aren wrong when their desires dont harm others.

I find it akin to people forcing religion on me.

 

And if I was banging on your door and shoving an anti-porn pamplet in your face, I would completely understand your bitter view. However, I am giving my feedback on a few points raised in a thread about porn on an Internet forum - and was actually addressing someone else when you initiated our exchange. The only reason I've stayed in it is not to put down your personal feelings about porn, but to refute your claim that porn actors are less likely to catch STDs than most other people. I thought (and still do think) that was such an inaccurate statement, it merited serious questioning.

[Scout]

I thought I better add that when I said, "I thought (and still do think) that was such an inaccurate statement, it merited serious questioning" I am not questioning your intelligence and overall opinions; just taking issue with a particular viewpoint you've put forward.

 

I realize that porn is a hotly contested topic. People have very definite opinions about porn, and it's hard to exchange them sometimes without getting frustrated. But...I'm always striving to articulate myself objectively instead of taking things personally, so our exchange is a good exercise for me!

[EvaGina]

Dammit, I didnt get home last night...

Ill still try find the stats.

Its not just for pron stars, its the entire sex industry... 3% STI rate

General population... 9%

(I did my health assignment on the Prostitues collective, SO interesting and really enlightening)

[Bethany]

There are many, many 'amateur' women who go online and show their bits off for nothing. They love to show off and do it for the thrill of it, they are not risking anything, being ripped off by anyone and choose to do it.

 

It's not always about paying the bills, being greedy, putting their lives at risk, being forced to,being drug addicts but actually DO enjoy it as much as the men who like to watch.

 

I think those who oppose these women really are more insecure and have more issues than the woman who shows off what they got with confidence. At least they know who they are, and if they make money out of it, good luck to them.

[Scout]

I think those who oppose these women really are more insecure and have more issues than the woman who shows off what they got with confidence. At least they know who they are, and if they make money out of it, good luck to them.

 

Just to clarify, I don't think anywhere in my posts I've judged women in porn, called them names, vilified them in any way...in other words, opposed them. I take issue with a few things about porn, particularly the industry, but have explained those to death already here, so won't bore you folks with a re-hash of that.

 

My boyfriend also doesn't view porn, so it's not an issue I've had to deal with in terms of feeling insecure if he did. But in all honesty, if I did have a partner who viewed porn on a regular basis, I would feel insecure, and wonder if my body and sexuality wasn't attractive/appealing enough for him. I would wonder what I'm lacking.

[EvaGina]

My boyfriend also doesn't view porn, so it's not an issue I've had to deal with in terms of feeling insecure if he did. But in all honesty, if I did have a partner who viewed porn on a regular basis, I would feel insecure, and wonder if my body and sexuality wasn't attractive/appealing enough for him. I would wonder what I'm lacking.

 

its just a masterbatory aid.

its not like he is wanting you to look like them... what if he masterbated without porn regularly... what would he be thinking about?

isnt it better to be blindly gazing at anonamous women, than to be imagining screwing a girl from the office? someone he knows?

[Scout]

its just a masterbatory aid.

its not like he is wanting you to look like them... what if he masterbated without porn regularly... what would he be thinking about?

isnt it better to be blindly gazing at anonamous women, than to be imagining screwing a girl from the office? someone he knows?

 

I honestly don't like either choice. What about masturbating to imaginary women?

 

I realize most of us fantasize about someone other than our partners from time to time. But I personally don't believe in flaunting it in their face, if it's something that would make them feel insecure. Just as I wouldn't ogle some hot guy walking by on the street in front of my boyfriend.

[melrich]

I think the problem with most of the disagreements about porn and its role in society is the definition of porn.

 

It's a bit like saying the "manufacturing" sector is exploitative.

 

Mainstream porn, produced by the big porn houses in California has cleaned up its act a lot and I think if you are talking about that sector of the industry, I could see Eva-Gina's arguments, particularly as regards to STIs.

 

If you are talking about the porn produced in Eastern Europe or South America then definitely Scout's arguments have the most weight, STIs are rampant in that industry and the women are severely exploited.

 

There is no one "porn" industry. There are big, professional production houses to small backyard operations and a whole bunch in between and there are different health and moral issues attached at all extremes.

 

Another comment I'd make is it is dangerous to confine talk of "exploitation" in the porn industry to the porn industry itself.

 

The fact is, many top 200 businesses make oodles and oodles of money (more that the porn industry itself) indirectly out of porn. Think only of the telecommunications industry as an example.

 

Whether porn should or shouldn't be used by individuals is a personal moral issue and to me, best left to individuals themselves.

 

In terms of the "morality and health" of the porn industry, you are both right and you are both wrong depending on how you define the porn industry.

[EvaGina]

I honestly don't like either choice. What about masturbating to imaginary women?

 

I realize most of us fantasize about someone other than our partners from time to time. But I personally don't believe in flaunting it in their face, if it's something that would make them feel insecure. Just as I wouldn't ogle some hot guy walking by on the street in front of my boyfriend.

 

He wouldnt be... a couple of mags under his bed or a few downloaded movies isnt in your face at all, unless you go looking for it.

 

The thing is, porn is just mind-goo... they arent wanting those girls, they are looking at pictures that stimulate certain parts of the brain... they dont fantasise about them, they absorb the images... (generally speaking)

 

Masterbating with your imagination requires a lot more effort and is more likley to help develop crushes and infatuations.

[Scout]

I agree that we did not clearly define the porn industry in our debate. To my knowledge, though, the California mainstream porn production houses still don't use condoms in most of their films. So, how have they cleaned up, other than requiring testing?

 

Whether porn should or shouldn't be used by individuals is a moral issue and to me, best left to individuals themselves.

 

Absolutely. However, quite often when a woman states in a thread her concerns about her boyfriend/husband using porn, it doesn't seem a lot of responders on these threads recognize that, the problem is, the two partners have different morals about porn. Instead, a LOT imply they should get over it, that they're being too uptight, that they should, in fact, take up watching porn with their partner, instead.

 

It's like we've completely inverted the sexual revolution. We've gone from an overly Puritan attitude about sex to an equally judgemental attitude towards those who aren't so freewheeling/liberal in their approach to sex.

[Scout]

Masterbating with your imagination requires a lot more effort and is more likley to help develop crushes and infatuations.

 

You think? I would think it would take less time and effort to just conjure up a picture in your head, then it would to get up, get a magazine or surf the Internet and log in to an account, lock the door, walk back to your couch/bed, etc...

[melrich]

To my knowledge, though, the California mainstream porn production houses still don't use condoms in most of their films. So, how have they cleaned up, other than requiring testing?

 

I don't know intimately how they have done it but I have also seen figures that state the highest rate of STIs in the US is amongst teenage girls and one of the lowest rates is amongst professional porn stars.

 

No question it remains a high risk industry, but so is policing and deep sea diving and being a fireman. I believe that the industry in California became very serious about O&H after 1996 and has cleaned up it's act.

 

But again it's a question of how you define the industry and for every professional film produced in California there are probably two or three backyard jobs and I am sure the STI problems remain a huge issue in those areas.

 

the problem is, the two partners have different morals about porn. Instead, a LOT imply they should get over it, that they're being too uptight, that they should, in fact, take up watching porn with their partner, instead.

 

Yeah, that is a compatability issue, not a porn issue. Similar to "want kids/don't want kids". Porn is just a catalyst.

 

Porn IS a problem where it has become an addiction. Then it is a health issue for the individual. Otherwise it is a moral issue.

[Scout]

No question it remains a high risk industry, but so is policing and deep sea diving and being a fireman. I believe that the industry in California became very serious about O&H after 1996 and has cleaned up it's act.

 

But again it's a question of how you define the industry and for every professional film produced in California there are probably two or three backyard jobs and I am sure the STI problems remain a huge issue in those areas.

 

Actually, Melrich, just three years ago they had another HIV outbreak in the California porn industry, so I don't know how much they cleaned up their act after 1996:

 

link removed

 

link removed

 

Every industry poses risks, however (and I've stated this several times now), my original reference to the risk in the porn industry, however you define it, is an increased risk of getting an STD because of the very nature of their work.

 

Both you and Eva have now stated on this thread that you have seen statistics that show porn actors have a lesser incidence of getting STDS. I'd still like to see those. But I guess I'll just have to hunt for them on my own at this point. I think it's safe to say the porn industry is one of the few workplaces where, because of what they do, this is a very real risk.

[Scout]

Actually, the second article I quote above is pretty interesting. There are some contrasting viewpoints in it. A county health director disputes an adult industry's healthcare organization's claims that HIV incidence is lower than the general population's. So maybe that's a source where those statistics are. I'll go look.

[melrich]

Hi Scout,

 

Unfortunately as I am at work and cannot at the moment access the website I can only direct you to it, google PIAA (Pornography Industry of Amercia Association) and there is quite detailed statistics.

 

You may say "Oh it's and industry site" but you will see that they do provide statistics that are damning to the industry as well as favorable to it and they clearly define what compnents of the industry they are referring too.

[melrich]

These were the rates back in 2001 before voluntary screening,

 

During June 2000--December 2001 (the most recently available prevalence data for this group of workers), before voluntary monthly STD screening was instituted, prevalences of chlamydial infection and gonorrhea among heterosexual adult film industry workers in California were 5.5% for males and 7.7% for females for chlamydial infection and 2.0% for both males and females for gonorrhea (4). By comparison, an analysis of a nationally representative sample of young adults aged 18--26 years during April 2001--May 2002 revealed prevalence of chlamydial infection among males and females to be 3.7% and 4.7% respectively, and, similarly, prevalence of gonorrhea to be 0.4% and 0.4%, respectively (5).

 

But I more than willingly concede that if you were to include all participants in the entire porn industry, the rates would be much, much higher. This only applies to the industry in California where STIs are far more strictly policed that would be the case in other sectors of the industry.

[Scout]

Hi Scout,

 

Unfortunately as I am at work and cannot at the moment access the website I can only direct you to it, google PIAA (Pornography Industry of Amercia Association) and there is quite detailed statistics.

 

You may say "Oh it's and industry site" but you will see that they do provide statistics that are damning to the industry as well as favorable to it and they clearly define what compnents of the industry they are referring too.

 

I googled it and it didn't come up. But you're right, I'd be very skeptical about relying solely on an industry source for statistics. I want to see something from CDC or another objective source that has no financial interest in the results.

[StarLily]

my bf and I watched some porn together the other day.

[musicguy]

my bf and I watched some porn together the other day.

 

 

ooooooo.....how was it?

[Santana The Freak]

I agree that we did not clearly define the porn industry in our debate. To my knowledge, though, the California mainstream porn production houses still don't use condoms in most of their films. So, how have they cleaned up, other than requiring testing?

 

you do know there is a female condom right, thats barely, if not at all visible?

[Scout]

you do know there is a female condom right, thats barely, if not at all visible?

 

If you're talking about this kind of condom, actually, the outer ring is very visible on the outside of the vagina: link removed

 

So, I don't know if by and large, porn actresses are using them since they would be visible. I Googled the question, but nothing came up. Maybe you can find something.

[Santana The Freak]

oh, i was talking about a diaphragm. close enough.

[Suesser Tod]

I'm not saying it should be illiminated, I'm only saying if you are in a good relationship, you shouldn't have to watch porn, by yourself, to get pleasure. You should be spending time with your partner

 

That is unrealistic. In a relationship two different persons are involved, and being two separate beings, they may have different needs at a given time. So if you are horny, that doesn't mean your partner is, so that is when you walk into another room, close the door, and play with yourself.

[Suesser Tod]

Sure.

 

I can see where you think there'd be a difference between Jenna Jameson-style porn and amateur stuff. However, a woman filming herself getting off is still exploitative and degrading - it reduces women to sex objects, and all I can ask myself is why they'd want to allow themselves to be viewed as such - nothing but an object. Selling pictures of oneself naked or selling videos of oneself in sexual scenarios doesn't scream self-respect or high self esteem to me. To me, it's evidence of some very dark corners in her mind.

 

I'm not sure how you want me to respond to message #3. With all due respect to Eva it's basically just your garden variety pro-porn message. Sorry

 

 

Well, everything you said is true according to your beliefs. Have you heard about exhibitionism? There are people that just like to show themselves to other people in sex related situations.

For other people it also means they are so comfortable with their bodies and their sexuality, that they are not afraid to show it to the world.

 

If a woman takes pictures of herself, and then WANTS to show them to the world on a FREE site, like many out there, how is she getting money out of it? How is she degrading herself? She is showing the world the body she is awfully proud of!

 

Last thing I'll say:

 

You believe that porn is degrading and "objectifies" people. I believe that the human body is beautifull and should not be hidden. Two people, two beliefs. You are not wrong, you just believe that, I'm not wrong either, I believe a different thing.

 

Open your mind and accept that people may have different beliefs than yours, and don't judge them according to your beliefs.

[Suesser Tod]

Again, we're discussing the increased risk of STDs because of the very nature of porn work, not the general safety of the various workplaces of other professions.

 

However, if you'd like to make a comparison - at least in the construction/carpentry business, workers are required to wear hard hats, safety belts, and other apparatus to protect themselves. The military wears armor, drives in armored cars, carry weapons to protect themselves. The porn industry, for the most part, does not allow actors to protect themselves from getting STDs by wearing condoms, the second most effective way after abstinence to prevent the spread of STDs. That is why there have been outbreaks of AIDs in the past among porn actors, and why there likely will be again.

 

I don't know how many regulated porn stars are out there right now, nor how many have died from an STD.

 

But, well, protected soldiers, with weapons, armored vehicles and armor have acumulated a high number of casualties in Irak:

 

link removed

 

Period US UK Other* Total Avg Days

5 1083 36 21 1140 2.46 464

4 715 13 18 746 2.35 318

3 580 25 27 632 2.93 216

2 718 27 58 803 1.89 424

1 140 33 0 173 4.02 43

Total 3236 134 124 3494 2.38 1465

 

From the same link, 23,417 (twenty three thousand, four hundred seventeen) US soldiers have been wounded in Irak.

 

 

Now, from the CBS news, it seems that the porn producers are even willing to stop filming if the actors are in risk, as they have done it. And they didnt' resumed operations until they had people that had been tested clean to work:

 

link removed

 

FYI, that was the most recent HIV scare on the porn industry, and it happened almost three years ago. So for two and something years they have been AIDS free, so their testing must be somehow working.