I don't think you know what MILF means. |
Small correction: MILF porn doesn't usually refer to incest, it refers to moms. Moms having sex with the poolboy, the delivery driver, her son's buddies, etc. etc. etc. It's basically the "older woman/lonely housewife" fantasy. Or um, so I'm told. But your broader point is valid - I read an article a while back about the increasing popularity of porn depicting incest, and how there was no corresponding increase in real-world incest. Similarly, I'm not aware of a rash of women with kids engaging in random hookups IRL. |
FIFY |
And that is probably owing to feminism and other reasons. But I would love to see you attempt to address the article I linked to. |
+1 ![]() |
No... it's real acts depicted in porn. Did you think this was special effects filmed on a green screen? |
This circular nonsense is getting really old. Stop acting like those real acts aren't consensual and scripted with the full, willing, informed participation of all parties involved. |
Many of the acts are not planned or scripted. In fact in the Frontline special a PP was kind enough to link (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/porn/ Thanks PP) the porn maker specifically admits that the woman involved does not know the extent of the violent scenario they have planned for her. It happens ALL THE TIME. And again- does consent make it suddenly alright? If you agree to let someone pull your teeth out for money, is it okay for people to watch it and enjoy it? Does that make it suddenly morally permissible? |
Scripted or reality tv. Nope, still not real. |
Yes. Real sex. No green screens here. |
We are failing to communicate, aren't we? You're saying that these women have no idea that they're going to be porn actors? I'm saying that they know that. I'm saying that the situations are acted out, they aren't real. |
Morally permissible? If I want to make money by having someone pay to watch me have my teeth pulled, why yes, I argue, it's entirely morally permissible. What makes you think it is "immoral?" |
Don't bother. PP/OP is perseverating at this point. |
She/they are arguing this: 1. porn depicts very "depraved" acts 2. "no one" and then, later, "99%" of women would "never" agree to these acts, or actually want to do them Therefore, all "consent" given through the contract between the studio and the actress is therefore invalid. Her/their argument is pretty terrible though, since they rest on a massive "begging the question" fallacy. Which, for those of you unfamiliar with the philosophical concept, means to "assume the truth of the conclusion of an argument in the premises in order for the conclusion to follow." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question |
Actually, that's not what I'm saying. 1) I literally never said "depraved". However, that works- to be more specific you could sub in violent, intentionally degrading, etc 2) The vast, vast majority human beings do not want to be punched, throttled, etc 3) Since a huge percentage of pornography involves women (and it's always the woman in male/female porn being treated this way) being subjected to these acts, that means that the vast majority of women you see in porn being treated this way are not turned on, into it, etc. Being subjected to physical violence is unpleasant as a rule. As human beings we all know this. And yet, when men's boners are being threatened, they will attempt to deny even the most patently true facts. This we know. |