7 ms·
"Everything in life is about sex, except sex. Sex is about power." I think the debate is not really about porn, but people's sense of justice, cheating, deserv
by bonoboTP 6y ago
"Everything in life is about sex, except sex. Sex is about power."
I think the debate is not really about porn, but people's sense of justice, cheating, deserving things or not etc.
Some feel like porn gives unearned satisfaction to young men, a virtual substitute they don't have to work for. The bitter other side will say, no shit, I won't slave away to get screwed over, it's much more straightforward business to consume porn.
A wife may feel cheated and less desired, and therefore feel like they are less necessary, a "resource" they provide is devalued.
Puritans may feel like so much sexuality and hedonism tries to cheat and get the benefits, while not suffering consequences, like pregnancy, adult responsibility of family life etc. That it hollows out the sanctity of this intimate and symbolic act.
Others may feel camgirls are collecting undeserved money, they don't do actual noble valuable work, just cash in based on their genetics and immorality.
It all comes down to a feeling that people get things they don't deserve.
It's about feelings that the young man should work his ass off to obtain status than satisfy himself with porn. The female performer should rather hold on to her sexual value and motivate men to work to get it and then only give it out when also taking on the responsibility of childbirth.
And therefore it's not likely that the debate will get "resolved", because it's not about some objective disagreement but about who deserves what. It's more metaphysical and depends on one's fundamental worldview and framework of justice.
- enriquto 6y ago> Everything in life is about sex, except sex. Sex is about power. What? No. This is idiotic. Who said that?
- tzekid 6y agoIt's a Fight Club (1999) quote.
- PartiallyTyped 6y agoIt was used in House of Cards.
- humanrebar 6y agoAre there "puritans" as such anymore? I think the theological morality case is more like treating sexual addiction, like porn addiction, like a sickness that needs support and treatment, at least more than it is now. The Christian perspective is that on a moral level, watching porn is in the same category as adultery and whatever sexual immorality that is depicted in the pornography. That's because moral culpability is in the heart to start with. Folks don't sign up for the same worldview, sure. And it's a nonsense (perhaps harmful) worldview if you reject Christian teaching altogether. But there's a lot more subtlety, realism, and (from their perspective) care for people than is captured by concerns about cheating and symbolism. More concretely, there is a lot of excitement to see progress on modern slavery and human trafficking in many Christian circles. The intersection between pornography, sex work, and sexual slavery is especially concerning in those circles.
- SyzygistSix 6y agoNot puritans per se but certainly people who push the puritan mindset, in order to profit from the hard work and sacrifice of others. The push for full time employment for everyone, framed as a good thing, usually comes from people who do very little work themselves while profiting from it immensely.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- gbrown 6y agoNo offense, but your take on social attitudes about porn is really strange and pretty misogynistic. > “ Some feel like porn gives unearned satisfaction to young men, a virtual substitute they don't have to work for.” What? Maybe extremist groups like the proud boys, but I’ve literally never heard this objection. People tend to worry more about socialization and the harmful psychological effects porn can have on people. > “ Others may feel camgirls are collecting undeserved money, they don't do actual noble valuable work, just cash in based on their genetics and immorality.” Again, thats an extremist misogynistic viewpoint. The real objections I’ve heard concern the exploitation of the industry and the lack of protections for workers. All the worldviews you describe are hyper-conservative, and don’t at all describe society as a whole.
- bonoboTP 6y ago> What? Maybe extremist groups like the proud boys, but I’ve literally never heard this objection I meant this part as quite analogous to the drug debate. People dislike drug comsumers because they feel drugs are a cheat: you get unearned pleasure without having to work for it. You sidestep your noble duties of working and earning the fruits of your labours by short-circuiting and hooking your brain directly on to pleasure juices. I think -- said explicitly or not -- a lot of the same sentiment underlies the anti-porn stance. That men can get (part of) the pleasure without the work. The underlying idea is that without porn, men would be forced to rather work on themselves, improve themselves, mature and provide value to society to attract female attention etc. Just like the (misguided or not) idea that without drugs all the junkies would suddenly go take on a decent 9-5 job and climb the ladder like one is supposed to and indulge in buying stuff with their hard earned money. Just outlining a narrative, not that I believe this simplified story, just that I think these patterns are lurking there, it's not merely about showing bodies and genitals due to some irrational arbitrary taboo. > Again, thats an extremist misogynistic viewpoint. The real objections I’ve heard concern the exploitation of the industry and the lack of protections for workers. What people say in public to look good is different from what they act out. Despite all the liberal attitudes in western europe for example, if you go to a brothel in Amsterdam, you won't see rich Dutch girls self-actualizing, or middle-class Norwegian girls expressing their empowered sexuality, but poor Bulgarians, Ukraininans, Hungarians, Roma, etc. Sure there are exceptions. But overall even most of the enlightened liberal Western European parents don't actually want their daughter to become a pornstar or a prostitute. For reasons approximating my previous comment -- that they are worth more than their mere bodily appearance, etc.
- johncena33 6y ago> Others may feel camgirls are collecting undeserved money, they don't do actual noble valuable work, just cash in based on their genetics and immorality. As someone who is a supporter of legal sex work and pornography. The "cashing on genetics" part bothers me the most. I don't know how to process when good looking people can earn thousands of dollars almost doing nothing (particularly on digital platform like OnlyFans), whereas regular people have to work day and night to earn a living. Right now, when sex-work is stigmatized, it seems fair because they are getting paid a lot while suffering the stigma. Similar to a lot high-risk job is also high paying because of the high risk. But once sex work gets accepted in the society, then why should they get paid so much without the work like rest of the society. Maybe if sex-work gets destigmatized it will not be very high paying profession.
- nsgi 6y agoI don't think it's just the stigma, to be fair. Earning lots of money through OnlyFans requires more than good looks, in the same way that earning lots of money through a tech startup requires more than just writing code. Also, people have cashed in on genetics for as long as modelling as been around, and obviously sex work is even older than that
- bonoboTP 6y ago> The "cashing on genetics" part bothers me the most Well, welcome to all of life. More attractive people, taller men etc. get hired, promoted and trusted more. Not just in porn, not just in regular modeling or acting or singing, but also in any job. They get better options in the dating market. Genetically more intelligent people have higher chances at high earning jobs. The pattern on cashing on genetics is extremely widespread and it's also not entirely clear it can be abolished without screwing up society. We do need the right people for the right jobs. You don't want to watch ugly people's porn (except if that's your thing, no kink shaming implied!), or marry stupid people etc. etc. You may try to console yourself that individual hard work can override all that, and it can to a degree, but we like to kindle ourselves in the fairytale of the "just world fallacy". Reality is harsher.
- 6y ago
- tomc1985 6y ago> That it hollows out the sanctity of this intimate and symbolic act. See that's the problem. We as a society need to stop putting sex on a pedestal. It's just sex. Pleasure is pleasure, why would anyone not want to be pleasured? And why is pleasure something that has to be earned? It is very simple to give and receive pleasure, why complicate that?
- toomuchcredit 6y agoPerhaps because many communities deeply believe sex is more than just for pleasure?
- Rapzid 6y agoBut not for making babies, as per the astronomically high unplanned pregnancy rate.
- pstuart 6y ago¿Por qué no los dos?
- saagarjha 6y agoYou can’t both value and devalue something at once…
- pstuart 6y agoWho's devaluing what? I'm suggesting that it can be valued for pleasure, and it can be valued for procreation. Because both are true (at least in the PIV scenario). The anti-sex folks are following old, overly simplistic, and ineffective campaigns to "protect people from themselves (via their genitals)". Most of it is well intended but oh so wrong. Edit: the only problem is the boundaries of power -- wanting to apply religious beliefs to the whole population rather than their particular sect. And I'd wager a fair amount of the conflict over this power is manufactured in order to keep the base riled up.
- 6y ago
- xg15 6y ago> Puritans may feel like so much sexuality and hedonism tries to cheat and get the benefits, while not suffering consequences, like pregnancy, adult responsibility of family life etc. That it hollows out the sanctity of this intimate and symbolic act. Not a puritan, but I could never explain that viewpoint to me with anything else than envy. Like, being careful with sex if it may lead to unwanted pregnancies makes perfect sense - but those people seem even more upset at the possibility of sex that has no risk attached to it. Isn't improving quality of life something we are all striving for? This movement seems to go the exact opposite direction and embrace suffering instead of joy.
- bonoboTP 6y agoSurely there is a bitter killjoy undertone in it, yes. Perhaps even more when coming from the old and weak who envy the young for their energy and enjoyment. But I don't think that's all.
- crocodiletears 6y agoSociologically, the worry is that larger and larger numbers of the young male population will withdraw, and become Hikikomori. Doing the bare minimum to sustain themselves, and riding life between moments of hollow, isolated, carnal release with no greater purpose and a constant nagging dissatisfaction with their marginal existence. From a perspective of optimization, it could be seen as young men reaching a local minima with respect their quality of life vs the risks and costs of its maintenance. The commodotization and derisking of sexual pleasure and titillation decouples it from the behaviors it's historically been used as a reward for. This reweights the incentive structures in our society that kept a lot of otherwise ne'er-do-well young people productive. I don't think this is necessarily a bad thing, but it's something we definitely need to have a collective dialogue about, as we no longer have any centralized moral or executive authorities capable of unilaterally responding to this shift in a manner that puts us back into social balance.
- xg15 6y ago> and motivate men to work Even this would make a moderate amount of sense if the work at least were meaningful. But it isn't - the only importance seems to be that the man in question appears to be successful in something, even if that work is actively harmful to society or the environment.
- bonoboTP 6y agoAt least it's useful for his family, and perhaps by extension to the local community.