The Porn Princess Rant, Re-Written

[LMNO, PhD (life continues)]

My point is that there is a wider meaning of prostitution (what you call the figurative meaning).

 And I am saying that it would be worth figuring out how and to what extent that state of affairs (people doing something purely and exclusively because someone will pay them for it) is responsible for the icky feelings I actually share about the sex-industry. I'm sure it is not the entire explanation. I am also sure that it does figure in the explanation."

Ok, I have a suggestion.

holist, you appear to be trying to start a discussion regarding the psychological/emotional effects of capitalism/wage slavery.  This is a thread about the debilitating effects of pornography/prostitution.

Although a Venn diagram might have the two discussions overlapping, you're not going to get the discussion you want in this thread.  Start another thread, and state your case without using the words "prostitution" or "pornography", and do not reference this thread in your new one.

Also, when people start poking you with sticks in the new thread, do not respond to them.  Stay on topic.  With luck, you'll get the discussion you're hoping for without an excess of shit-flinging.

[M. Nigel Salt]

What I see you arguing, on the whole, is that actually, porn isn't that different than other industries, except that we're all caught up about sex so we notice the abuse in porn more. I'm pretty sure you're factually wrong on both counts (the abuse itself and the perception here.)
(I know you've stated you see that porn is worse, but I see you arguing otherwise at the same time. Being inconsistent is not the end of the world, I'm just explaining why I'm still on about this.)

I feel that I am being wilfully misinterpreted. I'm not wrong on those counts because I am not making those claims, despite the fact that you see me as making them. At this point I can only reiterate. When I say this:

"My point is not that the similarities make non-sex wage slavery into "prostitution" in the literal sense. My point is that there is a wider meaning of prostitution (what you call the figurative meaning). That is certainly applicable to sex work (though it definitely does not tell the whole story, let me repeat that again), and it is also applicable to a great deal of other work (though by no means all, which is why Luna's suggestion of "job" or "work" as a name for doing something purely because someone will pay for it doesn't work for me). And I am saying that it would be worth figuring out how and to what extent that state of affairs (people doing something purely and exclusively because someone will pay them for it) is responsible for the icky feelings I actually share about the sex-industry. I'm sure it is not the entire explanation. I am also sure that it does figure in the explanation."

I mean it. Without a hidden agenda, without belittling the terrible plight of poor young women being caught up in the worse part (and yes, probably definitely the majority part) of the sex industry. Without secretly thinking that they deserve it. And I object to being cast in that light.

If you're NOT ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT THE SUBJECT OF THIS THREAD,

WHY DON'T YOU QUIT TRYING TO HIJACK IT AND GO START YOUR OWN FUCKING THREAD.

This is not even "thread drift", it's you trying to shoehorn your pet topic into a completely different topic, and it's A. fucking rude, and B. absolutely guaranteed to create much misunderstanding and irritation, much as if I pranced into some thread about politics and started explaining that modern art is pretty similar so let's talk about that instead.

[M. Nigel Salt]

My point is that there is a wider meaning of prostitution (what you call the figurative meaning).

 And I am saying that it would be worth figuring out how and to what extent that state of affairs (people doing something purely and exclusively because someone will pay them for it) is responsible for the icky feelings I actually share about the sex-industry. I'm sure it is not the entire explanation. I am also sure that it does figure in the explanation."

Ok, I have a suggestion.

holist, you appear to be trying to start a discussion regarding the psychological/emotional effects of capitalism/wage slavery.  This is a thread about the debilitating effects of pornography/prostitution.

Although a Venn diagram might have the two discussions overlapping, you're not going to get the discussion you want in this thread.  Start another thread, and state your case without using the words "prostitution" or "pornography", and do not reference this thread in your new one.

Also, when people start poking you with sticks in the new thread, do not respond to them.  Stay on topic.  With luck, you'll get the discussion you're hoping for without an excess of shit-flinging.

Or also this.

[LMNO, PhD (life continues)]

Your post had a better melody, though.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Your post had a better melody, though.

It had a good beat, and I can dance to it.

I give it a 7.

 

[M. Nigel Salt]

 

[LMNO, PhD (life continues)]

Holist, that reads as a very well-thought out philosophical argument.

However, it really is miles away from the reality of the situation.  You may want to read up on The Barstool Experiment for now.  This board tends to deal with things in a pragmatic, rather than idealistic, way.  If what you're proposing doesn't reflect the reality, all the reality of a situation, then you are mistaking the map for the territory.

Whoops, thread split.  I'll repost when I find it.

[Placid Dingo]

I'm linking a lot (I have lots of marking to do, and an assignment, and am dealing with that by suddenly discovering Reddit) but here's another piece relevant to an ongoing discussion;


Breast Cancer charity is rejecting money raised from ''boobs'' videos on porn site.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Is prostitution a 'norm' though? I recall an experiment with primates focusing on the idea of money. The primates would complete a task and get tokens that could be exchanged for treats. The females were observed trading sex acts for tokens... No pimps, no corrupt industry, just primates, tokens, sex and bananas.

Hrmmm, Primates, Tokens, Sex and Bananas would be a good name for a band.

[LuciferX]

Your post had a better melody, though.

It had a good beat, and I can dance to it.

I give it a 7.

 

[Elder Iptuous]

I'm linking a lot (I have lots of marking to do, and an assignment, and am dealing with that by suddenly discovering Reddit) but here's another piece relevant to an ongoing discussion;


Breast Cancer charity is rejecting money raised from ''boobs'' videos on porn site.

huh.
that's interesting.  my reaction is that Komen is in the wrong.  their views on pornography seems to be out of the scope of their mission...
the article gives the impression that if they didn't use irreverent language, that Komen would be OK accepting donations from them.  But i've seen other Komen stuff that uses a tongue in cheek objectification to which they seem to be accepting of.  ('save the ta-tas' bumper stickers, etc.)
If someone that was clearly horrible (say, westboro baptist) raised a bunch of cash, but used respectful language, i wonder what their reaction would be...

[M. Nigel Salt]

I'm linking a lot (I have lots of marking to do, and an assignment, and am dealing with that by suddenly discovering Reddit) but here's another piece relevant to an ongoing discussion;


Breast Cancer charity is rejecting money raised from ''boobs'' videos on porn site.

huh.
that's interesting.  my reaction is that Komen is in the wrong.  their views on pornography seems to be out of the scope of their mission...
the article gives the impression that if they didn't use irreverent language, that Komen would be OK accepting donations from them.  But i've seen other Komen stuff that uses a tongue in cheek objectification to which they seem to be accepting of.  ('save the ta-tas' bumper stickers, etc.)
If someone that was clearly horrible (say, westboro baptist) raised a bunch of cash, but used respectful language, i wonder what their reaction would be...

Pretty sure their PR people would weigh and balance whether the objectionable funding source had the strong potential to impact their ability to provide services; ie. would it be likely to turn off other benefactors from donating or potential recipients from using their services? Would accepting it send a public message that is out of step with their mission statement and code of ethics? If yes, they would be wise to reject the funding.

[M. Nigel Salt]

Also, quite frankly, it sounds like Pornhub is using Susan G Komen Foundatin's name as a marketing ploy. Accepting the donation would be a tacit permission for that, and becoming, in essence, a marketing partner with a porn site is NOT in their best interest, nor is setting such a precedent.

[M. Nigel Salt]

Is prostitution a 'norm' though? I recall an experiment with primates focusing on the idea of money. The primates would complete a task and get tokens that could be exchanged for treats. The females were observed trading sex acts for tokens... No pimps, no corrupt industry, just primates, tokens, sex and bananas.

Hrmmm, Primates, Tokens, Sex and Bananas would be a good name for a band.

 

Are you replying to something specific?

[M. Nigel Salt]

One last thing; I HATE those "save the tatas" bumper stickers (which are not in any way affiliated with Komen, FYI), because curing breast cancer isn't about saving breasts, it's about saving people from dying.