Poll: Bannable Fetishes
- Thread starter Seldon2639
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yup, what gives me the right to ban something when no one is harmed and some people are having fun from it? Maybe I find it disgusting, but why would my opinion would be só important that the fetish should be banned.ExodusinFlames said:
Well c'mon. Paraphillias are what they are. Sometimes they have causes other times they don't. Who am I to say that its wrong. Some folks find my tastes strange, and if they comment negatively, I'll bluntly tell them to get stuffed.
I propose a revision. If no-one is getting hurt against their consent, let 'er rip.ExodusinFlames said:
Who are you to say whether someone who likes pain should be disallowed to enjoy it? That's my biggest issue with people trying to 'ban' fetishes because it causes harm. It's like banning chocolate just because you can get fat.
But, take into consideration, if folks are utilizing pain for pleasure, more often than not, their blocking the pain receptors. The mind isn't registering it as pain. Its quite nice.Labyrinth said:
As long as no one gets hurt and its all between consenting adults, i don't really care what foul things people do in their private time, if they want to crap in each others mouths or vomit on to each other, thats fine, so long as i don't have to watch
Even if it's simulated, some things are wrong, and shouldn't be transmitted in a free society.
If I make propaganda that depicts a minority as debased animals who need to be killed, I shouldn't be allowed broadcast or distribute it.
Likewise, if I make something which, while produced without breaking laws, functions as propaganda for rape, incest, paedophilia, bestiality, I don't believe I should be allowed transmit that.
There's a lot of porn, which wouldn't be considered extreme by some standards, where what starts out as a rape attack on a woman turns into a sexual experience she enjoys. There is a strong case against the distribution of this material, based on interviews with convicted rapists. In studies of the sexual disposition of rapists, the above fantasy is the most common.
That's not to say that a video makes a person a rapist. They need to have something else wrong with them first. I however, lack the necessary expertise to say one way or the other if simulated rape porn makes a person with the ability to rape somebody more or less likely to do so.
This is one basis for which I would always have a fallback for stopping people distributing stuff, in extreme circumstances.
Most of us live in countries where materials which constitute an incitement to hatred are banned.
I don't see how anybody would have a problem with similar restricti.ons on media which incite attacks on the individual
If I make propaganda that depicts a minority as debased animals who need to be killed, I shouldn't be allowed broadcast or distribute it.
Likewise, if I make something which, while produced without breaking laws, functions as propaganda for rape, incest, paedophilia, bestiality, I don't believe I should be allowed transmit that.
There's a lot of porn, which wouldn't be considered extreme by some standards, where what starts out as a rape attack on a woman turns into a sexual experience she enjoys. There is a strong case against the distribution of this material, based on interviews with convicted rapists. In studies of the sexual disposition of rapists, the above fantasy is the most common.
That's not to say that a video makes a person a rapist. They need to have something else wrong with them first. I however, lack the necessary expertise to say one way or the other if simulated rape porn makes a person with the ability to rape somebody more or less likely to do so.
This is one basis for which I would always have a fallback for stopping people distributing stuff, in extreme circumstances.
Most of us live in countries where materials which constitute an incitement to hatred are banned.
I don't see how anybody would have a problem with similar restricti.ons on media which incite attacks on the individual
Pedant pedant Pedantpedant pedantpedant pedaaaaaant ped-ant (to the tune of the Pink Panther). Plus you're wrong.Sgt Doom said:
The things which I refer to as being wrong are the media created, rather than the acts which they depict.
That should be clear based on the context, to anybody with a reading age of 10 or more.
Crush fetishes...Seriously! How can one jack off to a women sticking a stelleto (Female foot ware isn't my forte, so that maybe spelt wrong) heel through a kitten?
I thought the context was about humans being hurt, just the way it was worded. Critters aren't people - So I thought it was a fair comment.woem said:
UMPH TIGHT LEATHER RESTRAINTS!
Uhm... Wait what?
Really. As long as nobody gets hurt against their will, and as long as I don't have the misfortune of being forced to watch it I'll let it slide.
Hurr, let it slide...
Uhm... Wait what?
Really. As long as nobody gets hurt against their will, and as long as I don't have the misfortune of being forced to watch it I'll let it slide.
Hurr, let it slide...
Fair point about "as long as no one gets hurt", but i think certain fetish videos, such as those of "rape" and those depicting some sort of torture should definitely be restricted, not because it freaks people out but because it fuels and creates fantasies in certain individuals who then cannot resist carrying and recreating those fantasy.