What is porn?

[Kameburger]

I've been thinking a lot about this a lot lately and I wanted to submit it as a discussion topic.

With the release of 50 Shades of Gray, there were a lot of people calling it porn for women, and I actually really agreed with this point. 50 Shades does make strong attempts to create something that is sexually exciting for women, and I have no problem with that. Than I saw an interview with one of the lead developers at Team Ninja concerning Dead or Alive and why they didn't change their art style despite pressure, and that large breasted women (as well as unrealistic statuesqe men) were part of the fantastical world they tried to create. And I got to thinking that you can absolutely judge this by the same metric as 50 Shades. Sure it is sexual and meant to entice men and maybe in the same sense there is nothing wrong about it. After all if the arguement is objectification well, I would say that a man trying to judge himself and emulate the actions of Gray in order to attract women is as unhealthy as a woman judging herself and trying to emulate a Dead or Alive character.

And then Russel Brand released this video [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kvzamjQW9M]. And I found myself agreeing with every word, about how porn is bad and the drug like effect that it has on our thought process. Porn absolutely can be bad for you.

But this actually did make me question something. Are DOA and 50 Shades some kind of porn? I don't know if I feel like DOA and 50 Shades are as harmful as well Softcore and Hardcore pornography. In my mind, I really don't think we should demonize sex, and an interest in sex, even if it is eccentric at times. But where is the line? I don't think anyone is a bad person for enjoying 50 Shades or DOA, or even porn for that matter.

Incidentally I should mention that I wouldn't support any legislation aiming to define porn or act on porn or attempt to bring the law upon those wishing to view any of this kind of content. I just feel like there are categories and lines, and the meaning of these words are changing and I want to understand if I am the only one who feels this way.

 

[Vault101]

"porn" is something made for the sole purpose of getting one off...often there can be cross-over between "fiction" and "porn" like for example sexy romance novels

I'm just going to preface this that more often than not men aren't (or can't) be objectified in the same way woman are...it just doesn't work

second is that....what turns one on is complicated

its been said that men and women view/feel sexual attraction in different ways...I'd be inclined to agree [b/]to a certain extent[/b] in that viewing "porn" from the hetero male gaze is about as much of a turn on as looking a medical diagram...or a medical procedure

not very

that's not to say "I" as a woman cannot get off visually, I can but...again its always small things, and context..context helps A LOT

so are you asking if DOA is ok because 50 shades exists? first I'd say neither are "straight up" porn even if they do veer into that territory, they are gross wish fulfilment for each gender and their problems (weather or not you think there are any) are a separate thing

ultimately no, sex should not be demonised. BUT the problem is where people think "sex positive" means [I/]WOO ALL SEX AND PORN IS GOOD AND IF YOU DISAGREE YOUR A PRUDE[/I] <-that's not true, sex positivity includes EVERYONE of every gender and sexuality, not just a validation of the perceived "norm"

I think its really important to view porn critically...from both the actual industry standards AND from a feminist perspective

 

[Kameburger]

I just want to clarify that I personally wasn't hoping to bring this down the Feminist angle, because I think that gets into more specifics that I don't really feel comfortable with honestly.

"porn" is something made for the sole purpose of getting one off...often there can be cross-over between "fiction" and "porn" like for example sexy romance novels

I'm just going to preface this that more often than not men aren't (or can't) be objectified in the same way woman are...it just doesn't work

Of course women and men will be objectified differently, but are you implying that objectifying women is more unhealthy then objectifying men? I'm here to talk about who is oppressed more, but more so that the issue with objectification is that it influences the expectations that one individual places on another. That is to say that women being view as sex objects is bad because men would treat them as such and not empathize with them on a human level which it sounds like the worry would be that this would escalate toward potentially dangerous situations for women. But in the case of objectifying men, a woman having the expectation that a man should act like Edward from twilight might actually encourage men to act like that weird violent stalker. That escalation is based on how some men might perceive they should act because that is what an attractive man is supposed to be. I fail to see how the latter objectification yields a different result from the former, and the assertion otherwise often seems more political than logical (although I'm absolutely open to it if you feel I'm wrong).

so are you asking if DOA is ok because 50 shades exists? first I'd say neither are "straight up" porn even if they do veer into that territory, they are gross wish fulfilment for each gender and their problems (weather or not you think there are any) are a separate thing

No, I've already come to the conclusion that they are both ok. And I am inclined to agree with you in the meaning, but again the required use of the conditional phrasing when describing it as not porn is telling of a discrepancy in our vocabulary which is at the heart of what I am curious about.

ultimately no, sex should not be demonised. BUT the problem is where people think "sex positive" means [I/]WOO ALL SEX AND PORN IS GOOD AND IF YOU DISAGREE YOUR A PRUDE[/I] <-that's not true, sex positivity includes EVERYONE of every gender and sexuality, not just a validation of the perceived "norm"

I think its really important to view porn critically...from both the actual industry standards AND from a feminist perspective

I'm not sure how I feel about this statement, or how comfortable I am in debating it. Maybe this statement just made me feel like already we are making judgments about what people look at and directly judging their tastes. So if porn is more realistic and representative of real people sex what does that mean? What's the real difference here? I'm not sure I understand the line of bad porn vs for lack of a better term, the "good" porn I feel like you're hinting at. I might be inclined to think that all consensual sex between adults is good, and porn reflecting the same is good too. So when you say looking at it critically from a feminist perspective I am a little bit confused about what you mean by that.

What I do remember was something described as feminist porn which was what appeared to be porn with women representative of the "every day woman" and not ridiculously touched up super model types. But immediately the thought that comes to mind is that if all porn was supposed to be like I don't think a lot of people would watch it, which while it may not be a bad outcome, would serve to be effectively meaningless.

If my understanding of this is wrong please let me know, I really have no idea about how a good way to be critical of porn from a feminist perspective looks like.

I also feel like people will find what they are attractive to regardless of what societal pressures we put on them more often than not. Peoples interests dictate what kind of porn exists, and while someones interests may be influenced by porn, I think this is not as strong as the other way around.

To conclude, I my mind, I really didn't mean this to talk about Feminist issues as much as we did here, because I think that there is nothing wrong with catering to peoples taste and my tastes and your tastes, men and women, gay straight bi trans people of all races are attracted to different things and creating things that cater to any of them is fine by me. And what Russell Brand describes I feel like is as much applicable to women as it is to men, and I would say that while I'm not trying to say the DOA is ok because 50 Shades exists, I would say that any woman who thinks that their attraction and subsequent projection of values based on the leading male in that film is healthy, might be falling into the same kind of trap than any man would if they expect any girl should be like the kind in DOA.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Best explanation of what porn is I read went along the lines of "the stuff you stop looking at once you finish masturbating".

I also feel like people will find what they are attractive to regardless of what societal pressures we put on them more often than not. Peoples interests dictate what kind of porn exists, and while someones interests may be influenced by porn, I think this is not as strong as the other way around.

Disagree there, though it's wider than porn. Beauty standards do shift over time, Marilyn Monroe is oft cited as an example where you didn't have to be skinny to be attractive (or rather, you had to not be skinny to be attractive).

With porn, far, far too many people treat it as sex education (or perhaps don't get proper sex education and don't bother researching it themselves, so the gap is filled by stuff like porn), which is a serious issue, but could be solved without changing anything to do with porn.

 

[Inglorious891]

Just because something's sexual doesn't mean it's a form of pornography. DoA and 50 Shades are both highly sexual, but I wouldn't say they're porn. Something that's sexual is more meant to entertain and to titillate, while porn is purely titillation; I'd also say the amount of nudity also helps determine if something's sexual or straight up porn.

As for the, "Is DoA and 50 Shades OK to exist?", yeah I'd say they do. Called me an asshole, but I can't bring myself to have distaste for people like 50 Shades while having an extreme discomfort towards people who like DoA. The whole series and the ideas behind it are just so... fucking creepy and dehumanizing. I don't like it, but it has a right to exist, just like I have the right to call it creepy garbage.

Also, that video is so full of shit. "Porn had this HUGELY negative impact on me, and although I'm not saying it has the same impact on the general population, it very likely has the same impact on the general population". Kids from a young age watching porn when they're sexuality is still being form can be bad, yes, but that video is a bit broad with the negative effects it claims porn has on people.

 

[Vault101]

Isnip.

you can't talk about this subject WITHOUT getting into Feminist territory...

in the same way you can't talk about digital art without getting into the technical aspects,

this is a topic that covers gender and media and society yadda yadda...I know "feminist" is a scary word but really its just another theory to apply to thease things we see/experience IRL

 

[Kameburger]

Isnip.

you can't talk about this subject WITHOUT getting into Feminist territory...

in the same way you can't talk about digital art without getting into the technical aspects,

this is a topic that covers gender and media and society yadda yadda...I know "feminist" is a scary word but really its just another theory to apply to thease things we see/experience IRL

Sorry, I just need to make sure that you understand that you're kicking through an open door here.

Absolutely gender is important, but I'm really curious about how these items relate to the individual regardless of this persons gender. I'm not saying anything about feminism, and I would consider myself a feminist, and sure I think many of the things I'm curious about apply to someones real life for sure, but that's not why I'm curious about in regards to this issue.

I can talk about the effects of drugs on a human being without discussing their race or gender, and for the purposes of this discussion I'm interested in viewing porn the same way. I appreciate your putting the input from version of feminism to which your prescribe in their absolutely, and it is certainly welcome. It's just not the point that I find myself thinking about.

What I don't want, is to start this conversation by immediately alienating people from putting in their input about how they feel about it personally, by feeling that they have to take sides in current social politics at the same time.

 

[Kameburger]

Best explanation of what porn is I read went along the lines of "the stuff you stop looking at once you finish masturbating".

Lol The idea of deciding after the fact is pretty funny, but I'm pretty sure that this makes porn a fairly big tent.

I also feel like people will find what they are attractive to regardless of what societal pressures we put on them more often than not. Peoples interests dictate what kind of porn exists, and while someones interests may be influenced by porn, I think this is not as strong as the other way around.

Disagree there, though it's wider than porn. Beauty standards do shift over time, Marilyn Monroe is oft cited as an example where you didn't have to be skinny to be attractive (or rather, you had to not be skinny to be attractive).

With porn, far, far too many people treat it as sex education (or perhaps don't get proper sex education and don't bother researching it themselves, so the gap is filled by stuff like porn), which is a serious issue, but could be solved without changing anything to do with porn.

So here's the thing, I don't disagree with you that standards do shift, but we really will start getting into the very fine details of different genres of porn but bear with me. My question perhaps is where is being attracted to something considered healthy and where is it unhealthy? Could you then go and argue that sexual orientation itself could shift because porn influenced a person to be attracted to something? I would generally think that most people would have a problem with that idea, but where is the line? Am I into lets say Legs because legs on porn are so nice or am I attracted to that and so I found porn that fed into my desire to mate with a woman who has that feature, and thus it is visually pleasing? It is often said that in the days of the Roman Empire, being chubby was considered very sexually attractive and the reason that is usually given is because being over weight was indicative of status, and that if you were fat it meant you could eat and that you were fashionable as well.

I think you raise good point about the education aspect though. Does our attitude about sex make porn seem like a safer environment for people to understand sex? is the fact that we're taught to be ashamed of our bodies and sex at a young age and that means that we are left to have the experiences by ourselves?

 

[Thaluikhain]

So here's the thing, I don't disagree with you that standards do shift, but we really will start getting into the very fine details of different genres of porn but bear with me. My question perhaps is where is being attracted to something considered healthy and where is it unhealthy? Could you then go and argue that sexual orientation itself could shift because porn influenced a person to be attracted to something? I would generally think that most people would have a problem with that idea, but where is the line? Am I into lets say Legs because legs on porn are so nice or am I attracted to that and so I found porn that fed into my desire to mate with a woman who has that feature, and thus it is visually pleasing? It is often said that in the days of the Roman Empire, being chubby was considered very sexually attractive and the reason that is usually given is because being over weight was indicative of status, and that if you were fat it meant you could eat and that you were fashionable as well.

Eh, we just have to write articles for newspapers full of complete speculation and rubbish on this one.

However, I think you can't point at one thing and say "this did it", it's a collection of factors, often seemingly contradictory, which combine to form the result.

I think you raise good point about the education aspect though. Does our attitude about sex make porn seem like a safer environment for people to understand sex? is the fact that we're taught to be ashamed of our bodies and sex at a young age and that means that we are left to have the experiences by ourselves?

Well, for those who don't get any sex education, all they have about sex is porn. Even for those who do, people who consume porn consume a hell of a lot more of it than then do sex education.

A more open and honest approach to sexuality would be a massively good thing. Proper education about sex, consent, contraception et al is exceedingly important.

 

[Queen Michael]

"Baby, don't squirt me... Don't squirt me, no more..."

Oh, don't look at me like that. You were all thinking it!

 

[Thaluikhain]

"Baby, don't squirt me... Don't squirt me, no more..."

Oh, don't look at me like that. You were all thinking it!

Well, we certainly are now, aren't we?

 

[StatusNil]

Well, let's see. "Pornography" is etymologically derived from "prostitutes" and "inscription", I believe. It is material that is primarily designed for sexual arousal in the viewer, though of course it can contain elements that are extraneous to this goal, such as the parodic plots of some porn movies. Given that definition, I guess the intent of the author is implicitly relevant in determining whether a particular work ought to be classified as pornography. What is the intended function of the work?

Now, I haven't read 50 Shades of Grey (or seen the movie), so I can't really give an informed opinion here. But from what I've read and heard about it, it may not be outlandish to suggest that it was written to offer sexual stimulation to the reader, making it a work of pornography. Some readers may obviously prefer the more genteel term "erotica" to distinguish it from primarily male-targeted porn they see as crudely direct to the point. But these are superficial differences, possibly rooted in the fact that a successful reproductive strategy for the female of the species relies on a careful selection of the sexual partner, whereas this is not necessarily the case for the male.

As for DOA, I haven't played that either as of yet. But it does have a fighting game in there, so I find it more of a stretch to call it pornography under this definition. Does it really exist to provide sexual arousal? I mean, are people in general really meant to use it as a masturbatory aid? Seems an odd claim, and if that were the case, why bother with the gamey aspects therein? It seems more likely that it is just using whatever sexual appeal there is as a selling point to distinguish itself from competitors on the principle that "sex sells" even things that are tenuously related to sex at best, rather than being pornography per se.

Incidentally, the rather pretentious indie game dev Jonathan Blow has apparently just been lamenting how most games are supposedly the equivalent of pornography and thus not respectable Art in an interview with the upmarket rag Vanity Fair. Now obviously most games were not created for the purpose of sexual arousal, so what is Blow doing here? It would seem that he is conflating the traditional stigma of sexuality with the openly functional approach of traditional game design. That is, they were created to be PLAYED, rather than as fodder for ruminations by the chattering classes. This does not sit well with the aspirant intellectual, Mr. Blow. The indignity of association with the ludic pleasures of the peasantry is positively hideous to such nostalgics for the solid respectability of the bourgeois arts like the novel. So he thought it might be a cool idea to try to shame gaming by equating it with masturbation.

Someone is definitely being a wanker here, but it's not necessarily the gamers.

 

[Sarge034]

Imma cop out and say porn is explicit sexual activity while nudes and highly sexualized things are erotica.

As for if porn is "good' or "bad". Eh, I don't know. Porn's a thing, perhaps it's just how we use it. Sex is still a major tabooed topic and because of that sex "education" is a joke. Many younger people look to porn to teach them what sex actually is. That can be harmful, yes, but I don't think that is porn's fault.

 

[Dizchu]

I think the comparison between Fifty Shades of Grey and Dead or Alive is problematic.

The Fifty Shades of Grey series presents abusive behaviour as representative of a BDSM lifestyle. Sure, discerning readers can read it without being accepting of the creepy vibes. People that practice BDSM in real life can do things similar to what is presented in that book in a responsible way. But the series is incredibly naive, poorly written and is one of the biggest sellers in history.

Dead or Alive, as far as I can tell, is just a fighting game series. There's some spin-offs with jiggling breasts. I'm unaware of the plot which could indeed be horrifyingly misogynistic, but come on now. Most people know the series because some breasts jiggle. That seems far more benign.

I will say that Fifty Shades is much closer to porn than Dead or Alive is, because Fifty Shades actually depicts sexual acts. It's erotic fiction, which many would consider to be porn anyway. Dead or Alive is just a fanservicey beat-em-up as far as I can tell.

 

[CrystalShadow]

What's the real difference here? I'm not sure I understand the line of bad porn vs for lack of a better term, the "good" porn I feel like you're hinting at.

I found it confusing too, until I ran into someone who had clearly been doing 2 things:
1. They had been watching a lot of porn. much of it clearly not depicting anything like real consensual sex (He showed me some of the stuff he liked to watch)
2. What he had been watching led him to weird, problematic expectations of what I should be willing (and capable) of doing while having sex, and to do things which are dangerous or unpleasant with little thought given to them, because what's necessary to be able to do it safely and comfortably clearly wasn't being depicted in whatever he was watching.
Some of it was in fact so messed up I'm not sure it would even be possible at all in a realistic setting that doesn't involve editing, preperation, and careful staging...

That was what really made me realise how 'bad' porn influences things, and possibly to some extent why. It's an extension of another problem, but it's effects on sex are quite disturbing.
It basically comes down to a person having a hard time seperating fantasy from reality.
While they can understand the difference, things are fine.
As soon as they lose sight of the fact that something is fake, and possibly not plausible as shown, problems ensue.
Unfortunately, not understanding how fake porn actually is seems to be a common issue a lot of people seem to end up with.
So it seems one aspect of the problem is that porn, more so than other things makes it easy to confuse fiction and reality...

But that's just my observation based on some personal interactions that ended badly. (very badly in fact, but I don't feel like going into that again...)

 

[Breywood]

This topic is a good one to bring up because the North American version of pornography is quite a bit more strict than many other countries. While there shouldn't be anything wrong with nudity, Americans seem to think that so much the suggestion of a woman showing part of an aureola should be something shameful. Given how we act over here when some woman gets topless, there might be a grain of truth to it, even though there shouldn't be anything wrong with it.

I'd even go so far as to say that a good part of the nude photography you'll find in Playboy isn't really pornography (although that means that the other part of it is highly suggestive), but the society over here isn't mature enough about nudity to separate the two.

I'm sure plenty of twelve year old boys have fantasized about the women in DoA, but you'd need a shoehorn to call it pornography. And the thing about "u don't liek pr0n? Ur a prude!" has partly to do with North American society being too immature to treat nudity as art without rushing off to the can to whack off, let alone something intended to sexually stimulate the viewer. And it's pretty sad when you think about it.

 

[bartholen_v1legacy]

Seeing a few comments here that mention DoA... just a question: does anyone actually play the game to get off? As in grab the controller and play the game, or do they simply use it as a platform to look up youtube clips or dirty, dirty stuff on Deviantart? Because I kinda doubt that, given how easy that kind of stuff is to find on the Internet.

The Volleyball games, now that's a different story altogether...

OT: I remember someone saying (maybe Bennett the Sage?) that anime is like porn: you'll know it when you see it. I think that's a good frame of reference. Things like the mode in the DoA volleyball games where you can freely rotate the camera around the girls sunbathing or have them pole dance are pervy and undoubtedly meant to titillate, but I wouldn't really call it porn. Pornographic for sure, like this music video [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0eKiULWw00], but not outright porn.

captcha: come on down. I don't know if captcha's hitting on me, or telling me to masturbate.

 

[404notfound]

Just going to give my opinion on the subject:

I don't actively look at/watch porn, I've seen porn that friends have linked me to because their reactions to me saying 'I don't watch porn' is usually: 'So you don't get turned on by this [insert link here]?' To which I tell them that I don't find the appeal in porn because; and this is just my opinion, I feel porn sort of dehumanizes the people in it and the whole thing feels kind of disingenuous.

To me porn is like "look at this person, you don't get to know anything about them but, don't they look good?", and it doesn't sit well with me. I feel the same whenever there is a random sex scene in the middle of an action movie etc. which, in this instance, just seems out of place.

I'm not anti-porn, if it appeals to other people then fair enough, but it's not for me.

To answer the thread question: I'd say something is pornographic if it depicts anything that is designed to arouse the person consuming it (media consumers just to be clear, no sex with doughnuts here), so DoA would be here, with other things like; page 3 photos in British newspapers.

However if something has pornographic qualities it does not necessarily mean that it is "porn". In my mind "porn" itself is anything that explicitly shows or alludes any sexual act as it's primary purpose of existing. A sex scene in a movie does not make the movie porn, however I would say 50 Shades would be because it was, at least to my knowledge, specifically made to appeal to the sexual interests of women as well as depict sexual acts.

I know the label "porn" is quite vague, but I am not in a position to get into the fine details of/to talk about soft-core/hard-core porn etc.

 

[Darth Rosenberg]

I'd say, ideally, the most constructive definition of porn/smut/whatever is anything a given individual can get off to, given that individuals can react entirely differently to the exact same stimuli.

I don't think legal definitions and 'formal' classifications are very interesting or very relevant - they tend to be more about collectively imposed social values (and prudishness per culture), than anything else.

50 Shades Of Grey is a film. Dead Of Alive is a game series. That's a much clearer way of looking at them, as opposed to wondering whether either can or should be classified as 'porn' or not. Some people might find lampposts erotic... but we're probably not going to start censoring lampposts on the streets.

However, the statement Porn is bad is, I feel, completely without merit bordering on dangerous ignorance. First you have to define what it 'is', which is, as I've said, tends to be rather problematic. And even when you've achieved that? To some people porn can be destructive, to other people porn can be liberating, and to others they just don't care about it.

...to some people alcohol can be destructive, to other people alcohol can be enjoyable, and others just don't care about it. Like most things, there is very little absolutely good or absolutely bad in life, and it's down to how each person chooses to engage with a given thing that matters.

 

[CpT_x_Killsteal]

I'd see it as on-par with "Highschool of the Dead", but for women. It's designed to titillate (fuck me if I've used that word wrong) a certain audience. Where DoA and HotD are not PORN, they are sexual.

Perhaps we should come up with a western equivalent of "ecchi".