3 ms·

One can enjoy porn while acknowledging the serious issues in the porn industry.

didntcheck 3y ago
Yes, actual issues of abuse against the actors, not pearl clutching about "objectification". I'll bet most of this verbal and physical "violence" they mention is fairly vanilla rough sex, a harmless thing that a massive amount of the population already do in their own beds (often at the request of a woman). Yes, that even includes consensual non-consensual role play, which is a surprisingly common fantasy (and again, harmless, and again, often coming from women) And that's not even getting into "proper" BDSM, which is subject to monthly "think of the women!" outrage; always by people who've no interest in hearing from the actual women involved I'm quite certain the people performing this "study" had already made up their minds before loading the first video
- AlecSchueler 3y ago
  > I'll bet most of this verbal and physical "violence" they mention is fairly vanilla rough sex It sounds like you've also made up your mind before reading it. How about taking a look and making some counter arguments to their findings so that people who disagree can argue on that basis rather than the basis of your speculation?
  - didntcheck 3y ago
    Yes I have read the journal article, and while their table for physical violence (as one example) does contain words like "kidnap", it also contains "pound" and "spank". Even for the "genuine" cases, I still maintain that the taboo fantasies of adults are not worth clutching pearls over. Just like with every moral panic about evil corrupting media throughout history
    - AlecSchueler 3y ago
      > not worth clutching pearls over Are we clutching pearls? 90% of the popular porn videos show taboo fantasies centered around--at the very least--spanking women. Is that not interesting? We don't need to clutch our pearls to make note of that and to discuss what it means. Pornography is very taboo as you've alluded to, but HN is for me a place where we can discuss anything that we find intellectually stimulating. I find it very interesting for sure that depictions human sexuality is apparently almost always in some small way also depicting violence against women. I find it disappointing that so many here want to write off the simple mention of that fact as "moral panic" and discuss it no further. > Even for the "genuine" cases What do you mean be genuine cases?
mcphage 3y ago
Yep—thankfully there are a bunch of people like that here too. But there's also a large anti-porn contingent.
- AlecSchueler 3y ago
  I guess I'm part of the contingent you speak of. I wouldn't call myself anti-porn but I would certianly consider myself porn-critical. Do you have any points to make that could be argued against or do you just want to scaremonger? I could equally well say "There's a large pro-porn contingent on HN" and then leave it at that, but instead I've shared an article and some reasearch that I'm happy to discuss.
  - mcphage 3y ago
    > Do you have any points to make Well, the fact that the title is "90% of online pornography" but from the actual study, it talks about 90% of the top 50 watched videos, so we've gone from "90% of pornography" to "45 videos". > I could equally well say "There's a large pro-porn contingent on HN" and then leave it at that Well, there is.
    - AlecSchueler 3y ago
      > we've gone from "90% of pornography" to "45 videos". Yes, the 45 most watched videos. They also analyse the metadata of millions of related videos. The headline is of course not the whole study. This is very common with studies. Any time you see "X% of children exhibit Y behaviour" or even "Mice respond A to stimulus B" it's implied that they have a limited sample size due to the nature of what is practical. Altneratively: What do you think might be a better headline? I would welcome a debate on the basis of that one. Personally I don't see the significant material difference between 90% of the 50 most popular videos depicting violence against women and 90% of all porn videos depicting the same. I'm happy to hear why you might disagree though. > Well, there is. Yes, that's a tautology.
      - sambazi 3y ago

Yes, actual issues of abuse against the actors, not pearl clutching about "objectification". I'll bet most of this verbal and physical "violence" they mention is fairly vanilla rough sex, a harmless thing that a massive amount of the population already do in their own beds (often at the request of a woman). Yes, that even includes consensual non-consensual role play, which is a surprisingly common fantasy (and again, harmless, and again, often coming from women) And that's not even getting into "proper" BDSM, which is subject to monthly "think of the women!" outrage; always by people who've no interest in hearing from the actual women involved I'm quite certain the people performing this "study" had already made up their minds before loading the first video

AlecSchueler 3y ago
> I'll bet most of this verbal and physical "violence" they mention is fairly vanilla rough sex It sounds like you've also made up your mind before reading it. How about taking a look and making some counter arguments to their findings so that people who disagree can argue on that basis rather than the basis of your speculation?
- didntcheck 3y ago
  Yes I have read the journal article, and while their table for physical violence (as one example) does contain words like "kidnap", it also contains "pound" and "spank". Even for the "genuine" cases, I still maintain that the taboo fantasies of adults are not worth clutching pearls over. Just like with every moral panic about evil corrupting media throughout history
  - AlecSchueler 3y ago
    > not worth clutching pearls over Are we clutching pearls? 90% of the popular porn videos show taboo fantasies centered around--at the very least--spanking women. Is that not interesting? We don't need to clutch our pearls to make note of that and to discuss what it means. Pornography is very taboo as you've alluded to, but HN is for me a place where we can discuss anything that we find intellectually stimulating. I find it very interesting for sure that depictions human sexuality is apparently almost always in some small way also depicting violence against women. I find it disappointing that so many here want to write off the simple mention of that fact as "moral panic" and discuss it no further. > Even for the "genuine" cases What do you mean be genuine cases?

mcphage 3y ago

Yep—thankfully there are a bunch of people like that here too. But there's also a large anti-porn contingent.

AlecSchueler 3y ago
I guess I'm part of the contingent you speak of. I wouldn't call myself anti-porn but I would certianly consider myself porn-critical. Do you have any points to make that could be argued against or do you just want to scaremonger? I could equally well say "There's a large pro-porn contingent on HN" and then leave it at that, but instead I've shared an article and some reasearch that I'm happy to discuss.
- mcphage 3y ago
  > Do you have any points to make Well, the fact that the title is "90% of online pornography" but from the actual study, it talks about 90% of the top 50 watched videos, so we've gone from "90% of pornography" to "45 videos". > I could equally well say "There's a large pro-porn contingent on HN" and then leave it at that Well, there is.
  - AlecSchueler 3y ago
    > we've gone from "90% of pornography" to "45 videos". Yes, the 45 most watched videos. They also analyse the metadata of millions of related videos. The headline is of course not the whole study. This is very common with studies. Any time you see "X% of children exhibit Y behaviour" or even "Mice respond A to stimulus B" it's implied that they have a limited sample size due to the nature of what is practical. Altneratively: What do you think might be a better headline? I would welcome a debate on the basis of that one. Personally I don't see the significant material difference between 90% of the 50 most popular videos depicting violence against women and 90% of all porn videos depicting the same. I'm happy to hear why you might disagree though. > Well, there is. Yes, that's a tautology.
    - sambazi 3y ago