7 ms·

Porn isn't going anywhere. The oldest known depiction of a human figure is pornographic [0]. Since porn will always exist, better that it be produced and consum

Porn isn't going anywhere. The oldest known depiction of a human figure is pornographic [0]. Since porn will always exist, better that it be produced and consumed in the open, legally speaking. Sex workers deserve the same safety and labor protections as the rest of us. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_of_Hohle_Fels https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_of_Hohle_Fels

lumberjack 6y ago
The article is not about sex workers but about virtual pimps and it is not advocating for sex workers but for the pimp's business. Big difference.
- morelisp 6y ago
  The article is not exactly sympathetic to the "virtual pimps": > Like many industries that rely on talent that is often young and naive, greedy middlemen (almost always men) who control production and channels of distribution take all the upside for themselves. A perfect example is porn mega-name Mia Khalifa, who was paid a grand total of $12,000 for only a handful of shoots - a tiny, tiny fraction of the value her content has generated for distributors like Pornhub. Nonetheless this problem is not unique to porn. We don't criminalize Patreon, Medium, Spotify, PayPal, or Visa. We probably should, but if we're going to start dismantling exploitative business practices on moral grounds, why start with the most precarious workers and not the most entrenched and richest middlemen?
  - neartheplain 6y ago
    >A perfect example is porn mega-name Mia Khalifa, who was paid a grand total of $12,000 for only a handful of shoots This specific example is used by the author to illustrate how OnlyFans is better for performers in comparison. OnlyFans performers keep 80% of their revenue and retain the copyright to their material [0]. Operating in the light of day as opposed to in a legal grey area means the copyright actually gets enforced. [0] https://onlyfans.com/terms/intellectual-property-rights https://onlyfans.com/terms/intellectual-property-rights
  - alisonkisk 6y ago
    New artists and performers get paid less until they have a marketable reputation. That's how the art/entertainment IP industry works, from porn to music to movies to books. Khalifa is rich now.
    - morelisp 6y ago
      All those other industries pay royalties. If you have a break-out hit even as a new artist you will get compensated a magnitude more than $12,000.
  - nailer 6y ago
    Mia Khalifa seems to be a liar: https://www.ibtimes.com/bangbros-says-mia-khalifa-lied-about-porn-pay-adult-industry-stint-more-3008238 https://www.ibtimes.com/bangbros-says-mia-khalifa-lied-about...
- spaceribs 6y ago
  Couldn't you say this comment is virtually pimping an idea? What a culturally inflammatory term you've chosen for any service that does anything to help facilitate sex work.
  - lumberjack 6y ago
    They are literal pimps doing literal pimp work: recruiting young girls, connecting them with clients, and taking a cut of the profit, while keeping control of the whole business. It is not my fault you are offended. I would have no problem if these sex workers setup their own site and did their own business directly with their clients. No pimp would be involved then. There would be no recruiting, which is also where I see a big problem. And nobody would be taking a cut.
    - morelisp 6y ago
      > if these sex workers setup their own site and did their own business directly with their clients That's exactly what they can't do. No major hosting providers allow pornographic content; none of the mainstream payment processors will handle the money; no advertisers will run their campaigns to find customers. This is specifically because of moral panic like yours driving anti-pimping regulations. OnlyFans isn't great - none of these more-than-a-payment-processor-less-than-an-agency platforms are. But if your outrage is truly about exploitative work and not oh look someone's having sex, there are dozens of organizations you should be lining up to take down first.
    - spaceribs 6y ago
      Lets break down your "pimping" attributes: - Recruiting young girls: Good infantilization here, you mean young women over the age of consent that can decide for themselves what they can do with their bodies? Those women? And how are they being recruited? By demonstrating the value of their service and being an attractive alternative to McDonald's minimum wage burger flipping? Is McDonalds in the burger-work pimping business? - Connecting them with clients: So basically any communication network is a pimping network? - Taking a cut of the profit: They are a popular platform like any other, a place where users know to go to find sex-workers, and they are using that platform as a business. Film festivals also act as middle-men in this regard, but does anyone say film festivals are in the "film pimping" business? - While keeping control of the whole business: I think I need a source on this, are they shutting down OnlyFan creators because they are linking to an external website? I couldn't find anything in their terms: https://onlyfans.com/terms/user-content https://onlyfans.com/terms/user-content
lucian1900 6y ago
That is now disputed. It’s likely it was a self-portrait, it matches the posture of a woman looking down at her own reflection.
- spaceribs 6y ago
  Can you please provide a reputable source?
  - weregiraffe 6y ago
    Can you provide an opposing source?
    - spaceribs 6y ago
      I didn't make a claim or refute yours, I was asking for a source for what you believe is disputed in the academic community.
  - morelisp 6y ago
    They may be confusing it with other Venuses like the Venus of Willendorf - there has been some discussion around the possibility https://www.jstor.org/stable/2744349 https://www.jstor.org/stable/2744349 - but the Venus of Hohle Fels has no head so the argument is more difficult to make for it. I also think being a self-portrait doesn't preclude the possibility it was pornographic or the more conventional (but imo also nearly equivalent) interpretation of them as fertility fetishes, as the original reply implied.
prox 6y ago
It never ceases to amaze me a nude depiction is called pornography. Anthropologically speaking it’s quite interesting. It may or may not have had a pornographic function, but the depiction itself would be described a nude.
- cblconfederate 6y ago
  Well for all intents and purposes, it's also true that SV treats all nudes, even partial, as porn, or at least "objectionable enough content" to disable advertising next to it.
  - prox 6y ago
    Exactly my point, there is a conflagration. And on-line the bar is set there probably because it’s so hard to moderate otherwise.
jejejfjf 6y ago
Jesus, you've got to be kidding me. Are you going to tell me that the "Birth of Venus" is also "pornographic"? Besides, whatever porn may have existed 1000 years ago, internet porn is a completely different thing, and should not even be compared.
- spaceribs 6y ago
  Why shouldn't it be compared? Is there something intrinsically different other than accessibility and quantity?
mu_sub_naught 6y ago
I agree with you that pornography is "not going anywhere". The utility of this media is to increase worker morale and make them more docile and less interested in "the hunt" or "playing the game" of mate discovery/signaling/courting. The mind/body during a viewing session is idled (not going anywhere) - tapping the reptile brain as a shortcut around the ancient accountability driver that is sculpting the self for mate approval & selection (sting of rejection inspires adaptation). Imagine the need to sneeze but never feeling the release. Backlogged desire for energy exchange nearly satisfied by staring out of a one way mirror (search results, Ex Machina) into an ironic public display of intimacy. An advanced society is romantic. Leave something to the imagination - construct metaphors to describe the act if it becomes so urgent that it must be advertised. Sometimes I will hear explicit lyrics allowed to project into public spaces. Are we baboons or humans?

lumberjack 6y ago

The article is not about sex workers but about virtual pimps and it is not advocating for sex workers but for the pimp's business. Big difference.

morelisp 6y ago
The article is not exactly sympathetic to the "virtual pimps": > Like many industries that rely on talent that is often young and naive, greedy middlemen (almost always men) who control production and channels of distribution take all the upside for themselves. A perfect example is porn mega-name Mia Khalifa, who was paid a grand total of $12,000 for only a handful of shoots - a tiny, tiny fraction of the value her content has generated for distributors like Pornhub. Nonetheless this problem is not unique to porn. We don't criminalize Patreon, Medium, Spotify, PayPal, or Visa. We probably should, but if we're going to start dismantling exploitative business practices on moral grounds, why start with the most precarious workers and not the most entrenched and richest middlemen?
- neartheplain 6y ago
  >A perfect example is porn mega-name Mia Khalifa, who was paid a grand total of $12,000 for only a handful of shoots This specific example is used by the author to illustrate how OnlyFans is better for performers in comparison. OnlyFans performers keep 80% of their revenue and retain the copyright to their material [0]. Operating in the light of day as opposed to in a legal grey area means the copyright actually gets enforced. [0] https://onlyfans.com/terms/intellectual-property-rights https://onlyfans.com/terms/intellectual-property-rights
- alisonkisk 6y ago
  New artists and performers get paid less until they have a marketable reputation. That's how the art/entertainment IP industry works, from porn to music to movies to books. Khalifa is rich now.
  - morelisp 6y ago
    All those other industries pay royalties. If you have a break-out hit even as a new artist you will get compensated a magnitude more than $12,000.
- nailer 6y ago
  Mia Khalifa seems to be a liar: https://www.ibtimes.com/bangbros-says-mia-khalifa-lied-about-porn-pay-adult-industry-stint-more-3008238 https://www.ibtimes.com/bangbros-says-mia-khalifa-lied-about...
spaceribs 6y ago
Couldn't you say this comment is virtually pimping an idea? What a culturally inflammatory term you've chosen for any service that does anything to help facilitate sex work.
- lumberjack 6y ago
  They are literal pimps doing literal pimp work: recruiting young girls, connecting them with clients, and taking a cut of the profit, while keeping control of the whole business. It is not my fault you are offended. I would have no problem if these sex workers setup their own site and did their own business directly with their clients. No pimp would be involved then. There would be no recruiting, which is also where I see a big problem. And nobody would be taking a cut.
  - morelisp 6y ago
    > if these sex workers setup their own site and did their own business directly with their clients That's exactly what they can't do. No major hosting providers allow pornographic content; none of the mainstream payment processors will handle the money; no advertisers will run their campaigns to find customers. This is specifically because of moral panic like yours driving anti-pimping regulations. OnlyFans isn't great - none of these more-than-a-payment-processor-less-than-an-agency platforms are. But if your outrage is truly about exploitative work and not oh look someone's having sex, there are dozens of organizations you should be lining up to take down first.
  - spaceribs 6y ago
    Lets break down your "pimping" attributes: - Recruiting young girls: Good infantilization here, you mean young women over the age of consent that can decide for themselves what they can do with their bodies? Those women? And how are they being recruited? By demonstrating the value of their service and being an attractive alternative to McDonald's minimum wage burger flipping? Is McDonalds in the burger-work pimping business? - Connecting them with clients: So basically any communication network is a pimping network? - Taking a cut of the profit: They are a popular platform like any other, a place where users know to go to find sex-workers, and they are using that platform as a business. Film festivals also act as middle-men in this regard, but does anyone say film festivals are in the "film pimping" business? - While keeping control of the whole business: I think I need a source on this, are they shutting down OnlyFan creators because they are linking to an external website? I couldn't find anything in their terms: https://onlyfans.com/terms/user-content https://onlyfans.com/terms/user-content

lucian1900 6y ago

That is now disputed. It’s likely it was a self-portrait, it matches the posture of a woman looking down at her own reflection.

spaceribs 6y ago
Can you please provide a reputable source?
- weregiraffe 6y ago
  Can you provide an opposing source?
  - spaceribs 6y ago
    I didn't make a claim or refute yours, I was asking for a source for what you believe is disputed in the academic community.
- morelisp 6y ago
  They may be confusing it with other Venuses like the Venus of Willendorf - there has been some discussion around the possibility https://www.jstor.org/stable/2744349 https://www.jstor.org/stable/2744349 - but the Venus of Hohle Fels has no head so the argument is more difficult to make for it. I also think being a self-portrait doesn't preclude the possibility it was pornographic or the more conventional (but imo also nearly equivalent) interpretation of them as fertility fetishes, as the original reply implied.

prox 6y ago

It never ceases to amaze me a nude depiction is called pornography. Anthropologically speaking it’s quite interesting. It may or may not have had a pornographic function, but the depiction itself would be described a nude.

cblconfederate 6y ago
Well for all intents and purposes, it's also true that SV treats all nudes, even partial, as porn, or at least "objectionable enough content" to disable advertising next to it.
- prox 6y ago
  Exactly my point, there is a conflagration. And on-line the bar is set there probably because it’s so hard to moderate otherwise.

jejejfjf 6y ago

Jesus, you've got to be kidding me. Are you going to tell me that the "Birth of Venus" is also "pornographic"? Besides, whatever porn may have existed 1000 years ago, internet porn is a completely different thing, and should not even be compared.

spaceribs 6y ago
Why shouldn't it be compared? Is there something intrinsically different other than accessibility and quantity?

mu_sub_naught 6y ago

I agree with you that pornography is "not going anywhere". The utility of this media is to increase worker morale and make them more docile and less interested in "the hunt" or "playing the game" of mate discovery/signaling/courting. The mind/body during a viewing session is idled (not going anywhere) - tapping the reptile brain as a shortcut around the ancient accountability driver that is sculpting the self for mate approval & selection (sting of rejection inspires adaptation). Imagine the need to sneeze but never feeling the release. Backlogged desire for energy exchange nearly satisfied by staring out of a one way mirror (search results, Ex Machina) into an ironic public display of intimacy. An advanced society is romantic. Leave something to the imagination - construct metaphors to describe the act if it becomes so urgent that it must be advertised. Sometimes I will hear explicit lyrics allowed to project into public spaces. Are we baboons or humans?