Live data from Hacker News

The Internet Is for Porn

themargins.substack.com

Post reply on HN

Print view View original

421–430 of 460 posts

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#421

Post by mbrodersen » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 11:41 AM UTC

bawolff wrote: post #217

kodah wrote: post #29

Porn always reminds me of other classical debates that have no end like guns and abortion. The camps of folks in the middle who are cognitively capable of making a difference can't because the outsized voices on either side of them are screaming for either total freedom or total shutdown. They actively fear monger people out of action so no real progress is made. It prevents the best coders and business people from w…

> classical debates that have no end like guns and abortion. I think this is a pretty american centric point of view. These debates don't have anywhere near the same back and forth in other countries (thinking of canada in particular) that they do in USA. I imagine how taboo porn is is also very much a cultural phenomenon that varries a lot place to place.

Yep you are absolutely right. Abortion and guns is a non-issue in most of Western Europe. And Australia.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#422

Post by Chris2048 » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 11:45 AM UTC

worik wrote: post #389

Chris2048 wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However, feminism is a (very) broad church and yet, feminists will talk about feminism in overall positive terms without qualification. If it's a broad church, it can't be all positive.

They do, do they?

yes.. anything useful to add?

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#423

Post by mbrodersen » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 11:57 AM UTC

pksebben wrote: post #370

Torwald wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For example in the media. Let's take major newspapers like _The Times_ or the _Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung_ as examples. You will not find any article that mentions 2nd amendment rights while not taking side against gun ownership. Every time the American practice is mentioned, it is scoffed at. At least by implication.

Perhaps there's a good reason for that. Not all ideas are created equal, and the proliferation of mass shootings in the states should serve as a strong signal that our gun laws are dumb. Somehow, the conversation has stalled here because some people actually believe they're going to protect their freedoms with violence. You know, by fighting against a government equipped with stealth bombers and death drones and navy…

Agree. It doesn’t matter how much ammo you store in your little hut in the woods, the number of guns you buy, the amount of Tactical Toothbrushes in camouflage paint you squirrel away. The government doesn’t even have to use the army. It can simply declare you to be a terrorist (using one of the secret courts), and send in the local gun crazy SWAT guys to take you out. And if you as much as look at one of your Tactical Toothbrushes when they burst through your bedroom door at 4am, they will shoot you so full of holes that not even your mum will recognise you. Followed by a press conference where the government will proudly declare to the world that they have eliminated yet another terrorist and back slaps all around for the brave boys who pumped you full of lead.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#424

Post by mbrodersen » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 12:04 PM UTC

mindslight wrote: post #378

pksebben wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps there's a good reason for that. Not all ideas are created equal, and the proliferation of mass shootings in the states should serve as a strong signal that our gun laws are dumb. Somehow, the conversation has stalled here because some people actually believe they're going to protect their freedoms with violence. You know, by fighting against a government equipped with stealth bombers and death drones and navy…

I agree with you on the practical utility of the 2nd amendment for defending against tyranny (and if anything it seems to be more of a distraction, encouraging tyranny to developed unchecked with the idea that it will be fought at some future breaking point). But with regards to school shootings there is a much more prominent and straightforward cause - mass media itself, both news and entertainment. And they're cont…

I am not sure I understand your argument. Are you saying that it was actually journalists that were running around shooting the kids, and not kids wanting to take revenge with guns they had easy access to? And that without easy access to guns the kinds would have killed the same number of people with, say, a kitchen knife? Really?

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#425

Post by lanternfish » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 1:01 PM UTC

mbrodersen wrote: post #416

klunger wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an interesting point. The problem, I think, is that as individuals, we only have feelings based on our own experiences. So, perhaps in an aggregate sense, there is more suffering of all the men men who are slightly stigmatized because they watch too much porn. But, none of them feel this as acutely as the single single sex worker who can 1) probably never get a more "legitimate" job again 2) may not be there…

If I understand it correctly, porn actors are adults, working under signed, legal contracts that specify, in extreme explicit details, exactly what they will be doing during a shoot. If they were actually forced to do it, then it would be a criminal act of rape, something that would very quickly bring down producers responsible for it. Do you have any evidence that porn actors in general are forced to work?

Check out Doe vs. Girlsdoporncom.

The decision finds that the company used manipulation and intimidation to force young women into signing contracts they weren't supposed to understand which were contrary to spoken agreements.

This company was big (maybe still is) and isn't an outlier in the space.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#426

Post by notsureaboutpg » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 1:01 PM UTC

saagarjha wrote: post #299

notsureaboutpg wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why shouldn't it be debatable? Porn and "free sexual expression" have a lot of damage they do to individuals and society as a whole also. I don't even need to list the examples because everyone already knows them. The rise of dangerous choking accidents during sex is a direct result of the popularization of that act through pornography. BDSM and the socially acceptable connection of sexual pleasure with real physical…

> The rise of dangerous choking accidents during sex is a direct result of the popularization of that act through pornography. How much of this is an actual problem, as opposed to the handful of cases that end up getting much more coverage than any other kind of death?

I think one absolutely avoidable death from an incident like this is one too many, but you tell me what you consider an acceptable amount of people to die so everyone else can enjoy more and more extreme porn and I'll let you know if it meets your requirements or not.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#427

Post by bonoboTP » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 1:41 PM UTC

tomc1985 wrote: post #374

cbozeman wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something given has no value. The truest line from Starship Troopers .

Sex is free. We are all equipped with the necessary hardware. Barring health issues it costs nothing. Why does it need to have "value"? This perception that it has value is one of the very things that people add just to complicate things. It isn't about value, or a chase, and to be honest I wish people would decouple it from anything more than intimacy. It should only be about getting you and your partner off. (And m…

So what is it about? Just the physical sensation of the friction of feeling the glans penis rubbing against the vagina? Nothing more, about validation, recognition, bonding, status, power etc?

Simply "sawing away" without emotion or "stakes", it loses value.

People don't just want to have sex, they want to have sex with some people, in some circumstances. Men are less picky (both out of necessity and due to lower consequences), but still somewhat selective, if for no other reasons then opportunity costs.

Nothing is simple about sex.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#428

Post by hattori31 » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 1:42 PM UTC

scpedicini wrote: post #358

toomuchcredit wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps because many communities deeply believe sex is more than just for pleasure?

Humans love to manufacture mysticism around the purely physical world. Symbolism is a terrifying thing. Nothing is anything more than it seems, and the sooner we get around to accepting that, the better off we'll be.

So damn well said.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#429

Post by bonoboTP » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 2:02 PM UTC

erklik wrote: post #390

bonoboTP wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The "cashing on genetics" part bothers me the most Well, welcome to all of life. More attractive people, taller men etc. get hired, promoted and trusted more. Not just in porn, not just in regular modeling or acting or singing, but also in any job. They get better options in the dating market. Genetically more intelligent people have higher chances at high earning jobs. The pattern on cashing on genetics is extreme…

In the coming decades, this will start to become a very important question I fear. What happens when "cashing on genetics" is something you can buy. Children being primed with the "best" possible genetics to ensure they're the most attractive jawlines, and lips that pout "perfectly" created as if made in a factory. Genetically being superior today is essentially a lottery, while then, it would be something you can bu…

Harari writes about this a lot in his book Homo Deus and 21 lessons. Up till now the rich and the poor still had a roughly egalitarian fundamental physical/biological existence. Sure, healthcare could extend and improve one's life to some degree even in the past but everyone is still fundamentally limited by the same intrinsic constraints. Rich people don't live 3 times as long, still suffer from diseases like Alzheimer, Parkinson, cancer etc.

But what if some people become fundamentally better, an actually clearly superior "race", ie the Nazi myths of superiority becoming fact (as applied to this new optimized race/new entity)?

Society isn't prepared to talk about it.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#430

Post by bonoboTP » Mon, Dec 21, 2020, 2:05 PM UTC

haecceity wrote: post #313

marvin wrote: post #195

What a super fascinating demonstration this thread is of why OnlyFans could never have been a Silicon Valley company. I'm not going to risk getting pulled into any of the ten different arguments going on here, beyond stating that I consider it a very good thing to increase the agency of the most vulnerable members of this line of work. But suffice to say that with this level of vehement disagreement even on whether s…

Does selling advertisements for cars or penis pills provide societal value? I think a lot of things we do don't have societal value but we do it because there's a demand in the market for it.

A lot of human activity isn't about value creation but zero sum competition for limited resources, rent seeking, striving for a relatively higher spot in the status hierarchy, reallocation of wealth, fight for power over each other etc.

Post reply on HN