Eggsnham said:
A controversial subject indeed.
Some consider it prostitution, after all the actors are getting paid for sex.
Some want to shut it down, for whatever reasons they may have. Mostly religious.
Some enjoy it and want to see more of it. Mostly teenage boys.
And some are indifferent on the subject.
In any case, I want to hear your thoughts on pornography.
EDIT: My personal opinion: I don't care. It's porn, you watch it or you don't. So I'd give it a "Meh."
EDIT 2: I'm NOT opposed to porn. That is all. So stop quoting me and saying I am.
By legal definition porn has nothing to do with sex, something that is offensive and without redeeming value is considered to be pornographic. Most adult films get away with what they do by not being porn in the literal sense, but "art films" which is why there is a plot, so they can be defended as having redeeming value. Putting sex on film and such is also defended artistically due to the fact that artwork has been sexually oriented since the dawn of time, going back to the greeks and romans and such. You start saying you can't have two people have sex on film at all, and that opens the door to have things like classical statues and pantings declared obscene and destroyed. It's an interesting area of law, I learned about it over a decade ago even though it was hardly a focus.
The issue of prostitution is skirted around by the fact that the people having sex are paid by a third party to do so for "artistic reasons". Neither of the participants are paying the other one for the sex. What's more even if the point was argued, there are issues about things like porn movies made in say Nevada where it's not illegal to begin with.
For the most part what we call "porn" is something that everyone is interested in at some point. As you get older the urgency goes out of it for a lot of us however.
I tend to see "porn" mostly through the eyes of my beliefs on free speech and expression, where very little, if anything, should be banned. While I'm deeply against child pornography and such things, at the same time I believe the shotgun that people take to it goes too far, since by definition many of those attacking kiddie porn are not going after assaults on presexual humans, but simply the innuendo of kids having sex. By many definitions things like "Buffy The Vampire Slayer" (Buffy is 15 or 16 when she does it with a Vampire who is physically 30 years old, and actually much older) would be banned, as would "Harry Potter", due to all the "Snogging", and of course a lot of books by people like Piers Anthony... and then we have the entire "teen experience" genere of films like "Porky's" and "American Pie". As things stand now, I do not trust most of the legislators we have in power at the moment, because any regulation in this area has to be VERY careful. In the US at least free speech is not supposed to be regulated morally (either on subjects like sex, or things that are more contreversial like hate speech). While children need to be protected from exploitation, careful distinction has to be made to single out someone raping a 9 year old on film, from "Buffy The Vampire Slayer" or "Porky's". By the same token when it comes to works of fiction, I become very wary of people making rulings against things that might be contreversial, but harm noone. Looking at things like "Lolita" (the book) it's moved in and out of being banned many times, but in general I feel that it's a bad sign when a society starts banning books for any reason.
So basically, I guess you can say that even when it comes to things I find distasteful, I am against goverment regulation. Heck, for that matter I'm so extreme here that I'm against the power many people have to limit each other's free speech by private ownership of communications platforms. A concern that has become very large with so much information going through "The Internet" all of which is owned by one private person/interest or another. The whole issue with Ted Turner a long time ago, was perhaps when the issue "peaked" but it's still there, and on the rise.
Apologies for the rambling, but the bottom line is that I see porn as being an extension of an overall free speech issue. I've long since outgrown "Wow! Porn movies!" (however when I was in college it was something else entirely), but I see them as part of a much bigger issue.
-
Now if you want to get contreversial (and have read this far) when it comes to pornography one area that is hard to defend is shock productions, despite the fact that being shocked can be entertaining. Things like "Funnel Girl" (look it up), Something Awful's "Swap.Avi", or the more famous "Two Girls One Cup" (which was actuall a trailer for a scat movie). There being no purpose to such things except to be shocking, disgusting, and offensive for the simple sake of being shocking, disgusting, and offensive.
Having argued a free speech platform quite a bit, I'm oftentimes at a loss to be able to defend things like that. Entertaining in a sick way at times, but really how does anyone claim something like "Funnel Girl" has any redeeming qualities at all? Mostly it exists to make people go "OMG, I can't believe I just saw that... I can't believe that really happened".