Abuse is obviously wrong and of course there are those that have been abused as well as those that have not abused. You only hear from those that suffered the abuse of course. It is true that "women are not just objects for your pleasure" but that has nothing to do with pornography per se. There's absolutely nothing wrong with sexual relations between consenting adults and there's no disrespect of the person in such cases. Of course many religious beliefs condemn sexual relations between consenting adult that don't meet the religious criteria (often where the woman must be subservient to the man). Our biggest problem isn't sex in the movies or on film, or even prostitution, but instead is the fact that there are those opposed to someone else making a living from sex because of their self-righteous religious beliefs.
Once again you have ignored evey statement I made regarding the abuse of women. Anicdotal evedece is in no way relevant. If it were you would be forced to give validity to the women who enjoy the work.
Like I said, I don't have any problems that depicts adults having any kind of consensual sex. I object when it depicts violence towards women. - - - Updated - - - Many of the women say they lie about "enjoying" it. - - - Updated - - - I don't think objecting to women being abused in porn has anything to do with religious beliefs.
Making it illegal will just create a new criminal class and do little to mitigate the problem. The reason is that a supply side war on porn is doomed to failure as the demand will not go down. Make it illegal and all one will have to do is access the darknet to view all the porn they want.
I do not know. These stories are horrible, but at the same time abuse happens at all kinds of work places; offices, schools, coffee shops, grocery stores and probably even at hospitals. I do not see these as reasons for banning an entire industry. Can it even be proven exploitation is more prominent in the porn industry than anywhere else? I prefer banning the perpetrator rather than the entire industry. If the Principal at "Political Forum High School" harasses his female employees and students, the answer is not banning high schools all together, is it? Apparently, some women want to enter the porn-industry and why should these people be stopped from doing what they want with their bodies and earning their money? Not that the porn-industry is even slightly important for society as a whole, but there is a supply because there is a demand. As long as the demand is around, the supply will be too. Ban it and it will still exist on the black market.
The problem is, a lot of them are NOT consenting. Former porn actress Jan Meza describes the fraud in the industry. She says that the actors and actresses do not know what they are agreeing to or after their initial agreement they couldn’t get away. Something that should be noted, especially in the case of fraud, but also generally, that federal law is clear that initial consent does not preclude the possibility of the individual being victimized. Pornographers, like other pimps, learn how to exploit economic and psychological vulnerabilities to coerce them to get into and stay in the sex industry. [15] Other times they threaten or use alcohol and drugs to induce compliance, which is included in some state definitions for coercion. The other criteria to establish that a particular case is a severe form of sex trafficking is that the minor is under eighteen years of age. Shared Hope International estimates that one in five pornographic images online is of a child. The prominence of this speaks to the very “severe” nature of the porn industry. Yet even among the material that is not deemed “child pornography” you can find individuals under the age of eighteen. Trafficking victims are exploited in the production of pornography Many women and children who are being sexually exploited and trafficked are also being used for the production of pornography. Sometimes acts of prostitution are filmed without the consent of the victim and distributed. [6] On other occasions victims are trafficked for the sole purpose of porn production. In today’s era of webcams and chatrooms, the lines between interactive pornography and virtual prostitution websites have been blurred. [7] According to Donna Hughes, “porn and internet sex shows are markets for trafficked victims.” Truly, pornography is another avenue for women to be trafficked. [8] Porn actors and actresses are often construed as no different from those who chose to have any other career in the entertainment industry. There is little cultural understanding that many of those involved in pornography are otherwise victims of sex trafficking. Despite this lack of general awareness, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA), which created our current federal legislation against sex trafficking, it states that people are trafficked into and exploited in pornography.[9] - - - Updated - - - ****Shared Hope International estimates that one in five pornographic images online is of a child.****
What would you like to do about it? Maybe if you could be a little more clear people could understand your point. Life is brutal. Humans harm other humans. The laws are in place to punish offenders.
I want people to understand that when you tune into porn, and most oftentimes when it depicts VIOLENT scenes, a lot of the women you are watching are victims.
Prostitution needs to be legal and regulated, as with pornography so it can be as safe as possible. There is no industry in which there are no problems. Our anti child trafficking budget is smaller than our anti marijuana budget, so obviously our country isn't serious about fighting that, which is needs to be. You cannot make pornographic images illegal, the situation will become much, MUCH worse. Legal regulation and enforcement is how we should look at this. People are taking pictures/videos of themselves all the time, so that will be much harder to regulate. It's still up to them and it's their choice. For those who are forced into it, that needs to be stopped of course, but there is a HUGE difference that Shared Hope International refuses to see. They are no better than Project SAM or other anti drug groups.
Yes, I can agree with that. Better regulations on this industry are needed. Like I said, if it really IS consensual, then I don't really have a problem with it (although it is STILL pretty disgusting crap that they show - yuck!).
I agree with cleaning the industry up, but I have a problem with people who want to make it illegal. That will only make it worse. Drug use is highest in regions with the most restrictive laws. The south claims "family values" but has the highest rates of porn watching in America! Social stigma creates an atmosphere of ignorance and fear, rather than science and common sense. We need to avoid that at all costs, from the right or the left. They both do this!
Porn gives unrealistic expectations for sex but is definitely better than any sex ed class I ever took for learning purposes. Masturbating is also a quick way to relieve stress and natural sleep aid. Most doctors agree it is healthy unless it becomes too addictive. Supposedly the invention of porn has caused marriage, births, violent crime and rape to go down. It's kind of like legalizing pot. If everyone is smoking a doobie or wanking off, then they aren't shooting or raping people. Some women think that their husband watching porn is akin to cheating on them. However, it is much healthier than using a prostitute.
I'm only talking about making those films which depict violence against women being illegal. What is GOOD about those films? I would think the harm is more than any good that comes out of it. Like I've said a million times, if the pornography depicts consensual sex, then I don't have a problem with it, no matter what it might be. I have a feeling that some of you may be older gentleman and maybe you aren't familiar with the disgusting filth that is out there nowadays. - - - Updated - - - While I might be "hurt" that my husband/boyfriend was watching porno (like, what's wrong with ME?), I wouldn't be TOO concerned about it. However, if I found he was watching depictions of women being abused, raped or otherwise violated, I would think that something was seriously the matter with him.
if it's consensual, it needs to remain legal. Simply because we find something objectionable is no reason to make it illegal. It's not for you or I to decide why or why it isn't "good". If it depicts non consensual sex, but the actors signed agreements and did this legal and consensual, then it needs to remain legal.
It is always "better regulagions" people scream for every time there is something they do not like. One regulation is often followed by another and another. Next thing you know you will end up in jail for watching a YouTube video of figure skaters- "You might use it as subsitute for porn" they will say. Regulations do not help and often do more harm than good; look at what happened during the Prohibition Era, look how the criminalisation of prostitution is going, not to mention drugs. I have heard certain parts of US have raised the legal smoking age to 21 and implemented cigarette-taxes which has resulted in a black market for cig's(!!!!!!)
If you think that was bad, there was an NYPD Detective that was allowing men to abuse his minor aged daughter, I got the arrest warrant and told him if he felt up to it, to try and draw, he threw himself on the floor and grovelled and begged like a worm, I took him in charge. His daughter never recovered and spent the rest of her days in a private high class mental institution, a very nice one.
That's the problem. There are TOO MANY sick people in this world. - - - Updated - - - Criminalization and regulations are not the same. Smoking amongst teens has dropped significantly in recent years. Smoking in general has dropped significantly because of education and making people aware of how bad it is.
Laws do not stop Teens from drinking or smoking, Education does as you pointed out. Many Countries with no Laws against Teens buying Alcohol or Tobacco have even less Teen use of those products, and even have temperance movements among the Teens as well as dance or disco places where none of that is allowed.
Well, would you want 7 year olds smoking? The reason why we make it illegal for children is because they really don't know any better.
A 7 year old with good parents (and later good friends) would never touch a cigarette his whole life tbh.
I don't know. My father smoked tbrough my whole childhood, saw him with that crap in his hands everyday and as I grew older some of my friends started smoking too. I never touched it and did not even taste my first cigarette until I was 18 and did not smoke my first (and only )whole cigarette until last year. Was never curious about that and same goes for alcohol. Never interested me. But I am, and was always, kind of weird.
Environment and genes both play a part. Some people are born to be more easily receptive to nicotine and drug addiction than others this is why not all kids with smoking parents become smokers themselves or why not everyone who has one zip of beer turns into an alcoholic. Good genes+good environment almost guarantees you will not become a smoker. Whereas good genes+bad environment is a little risky and bad genes+bad environment is almost certain to end in disaster. Even bad genes+good environment is highly likely to end up in an addiction.
I've known kids who's parents did not smoke who ended up smoking. - - - Updated - - - Good for you, but here in America, we want to protect our kids. Hence age limits. Just because a child did have bad parents or bad influences, that doesn't mean they should be ignored.
