4 ms·

Reminds me of a... peculiarity in Turkey. Men are required to serve a mandatory term in the military, but are exempt if they're homosexual. However, to prevent

Reminds me of a... peculiarity in Turkey. Men are required to serve a mandatory term in the military, but are exempt if they're homosexual. However, to prevent this being used as a loophole to evade service, the men in question must prove that they're gay. This has resulted in the Turkish military having a very large collection of amateur gay porn.

leeoniya 3y ago
this is basically that family guy episode where Quagmire tries to get out of his marriage to a hooker.
superb_dev 3y ago
So they’re forced to choose between military service or having sex on camera? I’m not sure I’d call that “amateur porn” if it’s not consensual
- Dylan16807 3y ago
  Wanting to get out of a pre-existing obligation that every man has, and most don't get out of, should not qualify as lack of consent.
  - noman-land 3y ago
    The obligation itself already lacks consent so anything you feel forced to do to get out of it is similarly non-consentual.
    - Dylan16807 3y ago
      If by "similarly" you mean "equally bad at most", then I can agree with that. But I think most people would rate non-consensual sex as significantly worse than a non-consensual day job. So if you say the sex on camera is not consensual, you're implying a very different kind of consent violation than is actually happening.
      - eastbound 3y ago
        > most people would rate non-consensual sex as significantly worse than a non-consensual day job The argument here is non-consensual. No work is totally consensual, since you need to survive. You accept a life-long inconvenience in exchange for a beautiful house. Can we make sex consensual in exchange for a large enough inconvenience? The response lies in an experiment: Propose a menial job to prostitutes. Even at the same rate, most prefer their occupation. Therefore it’s consensual. A funny quirk about non-consensual work is that the 1930’s ILO convention against slavery and forced work… excluded able-bodied men in age of working (article 11). Which kind of defeats the purpose of the convention. This article was only abolished in 1957. But compulsory military service still exists in probably half of the world countries.
  - superb_dev 3y ago
    What part of that isn't a lack of consent? Forced consent is not consent, their only other option was forced military service.
- basil-rash 3y ago
  The Overton window has shifted such that two adults agreeing to engage in sexual activity in front of a camera can be in any way considered “non-consensual”? Wild. Do you think adult actors agreeing to engage in sexual activity in front of a camera, but only because they have chosen to do that for a living when other viable employment alternatives were available, is also “non-consensual”?
  - willcipriano 3y ago
    "Hey I made this guy really mad go fight him for me" "No he will kill me!" "Alternatively you could have sex and let me film it" Consent.
    - Dylan16807 3y ago
      The problem is in line 1, not line 3. There would be some serious issues with 3 if 1 was a fake threat meant to push you into 3, but it's not. The vast majority go along with 1.
      - willcipriano 3y ago
        I see it as rape with a implied third party threat of violence instead of a first party one. You may feel differently if you feel that men's bodies belong to the state to be used in wars.
        Dylan16807 3y ago
        The violence was already there. It's not a threat to say and honestly mean "otherwise nothing changes (99% of people pick this option)". The consent issues are all in the forced service itself, and apply to every man equally, whether or not they take the gay proof exemption.
        godelski 3y ago
        The violence was not "already there." The violence is generated by the men who are not at risk of going to war. There's an old saying about two people of different nationalities: The difference between you and me is smaller than the difference between us and our respective leaders. Leaders must convince the public that some person in a far away land hates them and is coming to kill them, because otherwise no one gives a fuck. Because frankly, no one is going to come into contact with another. Normal people are not the ones going to invade other countries and claim territory.
- samatman 3y ago
  My position is that the requirement was humiliating (a sibling comment says this has been discontinued, which is all to the good) and there's nothing consensual about mandatory military service. This was all explained to me in a verbal conversation, so I could be wrong about this part, but homosexuals didn't have to skip their military service, however many wanted to because they would be punished if caught in the act, so to speak. That makes deciding whether or not to submit photographic evidence into a pretty hard decision, but again, the nonconsensual part is being forced to serve in the military in the first place. I would also guess that the number of men who submitted to anal intercourse on camera with someone they wouldn't normally have sex with is approximately zero, so it qualifies as consensual in the ordinary sense. I'm not sure calling the result "amateur gay porn" is the ideal way to put it, but it is in fact all of amateur, pornographic, and gay.
archon1410 3y ago
Apparently it doesn't happen anymore. > The system has been undergoing change for the past few years: Lambda Istanbul's lawyer Fırat Söyle stated in 2012 that the rectal examinations, and the photographic evidence of anal intercourse have been dismissed as requirements when they gained worldwide and national media attention. — https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_certificate https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_certificate But from when it did happen, it sounds... bad. > "With the picture it was a bit difficult. The face had to be recognizable as well as the penis and the ass. To put all this into a square was a bit complicated. Twice I got cramps because of the position. […] I also got humiliated at the selection, before they announce it [the final diagnosis]. There are about 12 military people, big ones, with uniforms and everything. […] They all looked one by one at the pictures and I had to bring ten pictures, ten different positions there. This is the difficulty of course, but I managed to do it. And at every single picture they looked and compared it with me. I was standing in the middle. And then they asked me questions. For example which positions I like and if I use this position they see regularly. Questions like that." — Irlenkauser, Julian. "Gender Identities and the Turkish Military." Thesis. European University Viadrina / Istanbul Bilgi University, 2012.
- wkat4242 3y ago
  It's weird anyway. I know gay people that never do anal. That seems a weird "proof" despite it being completely out of line to expect that anyway.
thifedfuuf567_ 3y ago
[flagged]
kilroy123 3y ago
I've never once heard of this, and I've spent years living in Turkey.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

leeoniya 3y ago

this is basically that family guy episode where Quagmire tries to get out of his marriage to a hooker.

superb_dev 3y ago

So they’re forced to choose between military service or having sex on camera? I’m not sure I’d call that “amateur porn” if it’s not consensual

Dylan16807 3y ago
Wanting to get out of a pre-existing obligation that every man has, and most don't get out of, should not qualify as lack of consent.
- noman-land 3y ago
  The obligation itself already lacks consent so anything you feel forced to do to get out of it is similarly non-consentual.
  - Dylan16807 3y ago
    If by "similarly" you mean "equally bad at most", then I can agree with that. But I think most people would rate non-consensual sex as significantly worse than a non-consensual day job. So if you say the sex on camera is not consensual, you're implying a very different kind of consent violation than is actually happening.
    - eastbound 3y ago
      > most people would rate non-consensual sex as significantly worse than a non-consensual day job The argument here is non-consensual. No work is totally consensual, since you need to survive. You accept a life-long inconvenience in exchange for a beautiful house. Can we make sex consensual in exchange for a large enough inconvenience? The response lies in an experiment: Propose a menial job to prostitutes. Even at the same rate, most prefer their occupation. Therefore it’s consensual. A funny quirk about non-consensual work is that the 1930’s ILO convention against slavery and forced work… excluded able-bodied men in age of working (article 11). Which kind of defeats the purpose of the convention. This article was only abolished in 1957. But compulsory military service still exists in probably half of the world countries.
- superb_dev 3y ago
  What part of that isn't a lack of consent? Forced consent is not consent, their only other option was forced military service.
basil-rash 3y ago
The Overton window has shifted such that two adults agreeing to engage in sexual activity in front of a camera can be in any way considered “non-consensual”? Wild. Do you think adult actors agreeing to engage in sexual activity in front of a camera, but only because they have chosen to do that for a living when other viable employment alternatives were available, is also “non-consensual”?
- willcipriano 3y ago
  "Hey I made this guy really mad go fight him for me" "No he will kill me!" "Alternatively you could have sex and let me film it" Consent.
  - Dylan16807 3y ago
    The problem is in line 1, not line 3. There would be some serious issues with 3 if 1 was a fake threat meant to push you into 3, but it's not. The vast majority go along with 1.
    - willcipriano 3y ago
      I see it as rape with a implied third party threat of violence instead of a first party one. You may feel differently if you feel that men's bodies belong to the state to be used in wars.
      - Dylan16807 3y ago
        The violence was already there. It's not a threat to say and honestly mean "otherwise nothing changes (99% of people pick this option)". The consent issues are all in the forced service itself, and apply to every man equally, whether or not they take the gay proof exemption.
        godelski 3y ago
        The violence was not "already there." The violence is generated by the men who are not at risk of going to war. There's an old saying about two people of different nationalities: The difference between you and me is smaller than the difference between us and our respective leaders. Leaders must convince the public that some person in a far away land hates them and is coming to kill them, because otherwise no one gives a fuck. Because frankly, no one is going to come into contact with another. Normal people are not the ones going to invade other countries and claim territory.
samatman 3y ago
My position is that the requirement was humiliating (a sibling comment says this has been discontinued, which is all to the good) and there's nothing consensual about mandatory military service. This was all explained to me in a verbal conversation, so I could be wrong about this part, but homosexuals didn't have to skip their military service, however many wanted to because they would be punished if caught in the act, so to speak. That makes deciding whether or not to submit photographic evidence into a pretty hard decision, but again, the nonconsensual part is being forced to serve in the military in the first place. I would also guess that the number of men who submitted to anal intercourse on camera with someone they wouldn't normally have sex with is approximately zero, so it qualifies as consensual in the ordinary sense. I'm not sure calling the result "amateur gay porn" is the ideal way to put it, but it is in fact all of amateur, pornographic, and gay.

archon1410 3y ago

Apparently it doesn't happen anymore. > The system has been undergoing change for the past few years: Lambda Istanbul's lawyer Fırat Söyle stated in 2012 that the rectal examinations, and the photographic evidence of anal intercourse have been dismissed as requirements when they gained worldwide and national media attention. — https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_certificate https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_certificate But from when it did happen, it sounds... bad. > "With the picture it was a bit difficult. The face had to be recognizable as well as the penis and the ass. To put all this into a square was a bit complicated. Twice I got cramps because of the position. […] I also got humiliated at the selection, before they announce it [the final diagnosis]. There are about 12 military people, big ones, with uniforms and everything. […] They all looked one by one at the pictures and I had to bring ten pictures, ten different positions there. This is the difficulty of course, but I managed to do it. And at every single picture they looked and compared it with me. I was standing in the middle. And then they asked me questions. For example which positions I like and if I use this position they see regularly. Questions like that." — Irlenkauser, Julian. "Gender Identities and the Turkish Military." Thesis. European University Viadrina / Istanbul Bilgi University, 2012.

wkat4242 3y ago
It's weird anyway. I know gay people that never do anal. That seems a weird "proof" despite it being completely out of line to expect that anyway.

thifedfuuf567_ 3y ago

[flagged]

kilroy123 3y ago

I've never once heard of this, and I've spent years living in Turkey.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]