melon said:Religion hurts more people every day than porn does.
Shall we have an FBI investigation that results in the banning of religion?
Melon
Irvine511 said:
i think it's a huge, huge mistake to compare, say, the worst natural disaster on American soil since 1906 to the porn industry.
also, i think you underestimate women in the porn industry -- there's sexism embedded in your post.
nbcrusader said:
Irvine, you can do better.
Rather than discussion the issue, you resorted to old FYM tricks. Both statements torture what I said to divert the subject.
Dreadsox said:I am a little surprised....
Is it everyone except NBC's contention that the porn industry does not harm anyone?
I am not looking for Christian Taliban answers....or incvestigate Bush. There is a serious topic that can be discussed here without the mudslinging.
Irvine511 said:i thought you were playing those FYM tricks -- making a baseless comparison.
also, i do think there was sexism in your post, that all women are held at gunpoint against their will by big, bad men and forced to make these films. it's simply not the case. many women actively choose to go into porn -- and i think you're also focusing too narrowly between what is considered hard-core porn (actual intercourse) and other kinds of porn, like Playboy/Penthouse. many of these women are simply aspiring models and are eager to work -- sometimes this leads to movie roles (though probably not credibility).
come on -- you're from southern california, you know what the industry is like.
nbcrusader said:
Sorry, perhaps this is a problem with the FYM model for communication. I've never suggested that all women are forced into porn. But, I've challenged the notion that all women participate in the porn industry on a fully consensual basis.
And, if there were some who are not participating on a fully consensual basis, would we not as a society have an interest in protecting these women from participating on a non-consensual basis?
nbcrusader said:
And, if there were some who are not participating on a fully consensual basis, would we not as a society have an interest in protecting these women from participating on a non-consensual basis?
indra said:There are laws and means of enforcement for that. They have to be willing to file complaints and law enforcement needs to act on those without the "prostitutes/porn stars can't be raped" attitude.
indra said:
But the program noted in the article Irvine posted doesn't focus on this area, rather it focuses on the belief that porn itself is evil. I don't want the FBI being the morals police...hell, I don't want morals police, period. I am perfectly capable of deciding for myself what is morally acceptable, thank you very much.
nbcrusader said:
Surely, you would realize that many of the victims would be fearful or reluctant to come forward and press charges.
Irvine511 said:could you give me an example of charges that might be pressed?
nbcrusader said:
Rape, battery, unlawfully detention, assult, etc., are just a few examples of charges that could be brought if there were non-consentiual participation in porn.
nbcrusader said:Even in mainstream porn, you would need to evaluate whether true consent is given when someone signs a form. Did they understand the form? Were they coerced into signing the form?
A lot of un-answered questions.
Dreadsox said:I do have a problem with the belief that all porn available to us was made under circumstances that we would condone.
Moonlit_Angel said:to Irvine and melon. If everyone's consenting, and of legal age, tell me again what exactly the problem is? Or why I (or the government, for that matter) should care if someone in, say, California is looking at porn in their own home?
Angela