Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Internet Is for Porn

themargins.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 460 posts

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#431

Post by cbozeman »

mbrodersen wrote: post #415
cbozeman wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why is it such an extremely hard to believe fact that maybe there are people out there that aren't doing it because they are desperate sluts that are failures of society and are actually doing it because its work that they enjoy. Probably because we're biologically programmed to understand that's not the case? It boils down to a simple, but true, undeniable - and apparently for a lot of people, unpleasant - maxim f…

You clearly have very limited experience with woman. Claiming that all woman are or are not X (for any X) shows that your view of woman is simple enough to almost be a caricature. I am interested in what evidence you have for “we’re biologically programmed to understand ...” I have never heard or seen any evidence for that. So it would be interesting to see what evidence you have for such a strong broad statement?

> So it would be interesting to see what evidence you have for such a strong broad statement?

The entirety of the field of evolutionary psychology.

I had a huge post typed up, but I realize that because you immediately went on the attack:

> You clearly have very limited experience with woman.

You're not interested in actually learning anything. You think you already know. You think you've read all the literature. You actually think you're well-informed.

What you want is for people to shut the fuck up and agree with, because you don't want your worldview challenged.

> Claiming that all woman are or are not X (for any X) shows that your view of woman is simple enough to almost be a caricature.

You talk about being a caricature, then immediately go for a statement like this, which is a combination of the worst kind of pedantry and high-functional mental disability...

Here's one for you. Fact: Men are stronger than women. When a biologist says this, they don't mean every man is stronger than every woman. They mean almost all men are stronger than almost all women.

This is one, of many papers in the field: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0265407513487638

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#432

Post by dragonwriter »

mbrodersen wrote: post #417
dragonwriter wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The author's bias about how the women, _who are actually getting monetarily compensated_, are the victims Being monetarily compensated doesn't prevent being a victim, which is the basis of all labor protection legislation beyond “workers must get paid at least a token amount”.

If I understand it correctly, the sex workers are adults who has signed contracts to do a specific job for a specific amount of $ The same as a factory worker who might end up loosing their health or lives doing their job. What is the difference exactly?

> What is the difference exactly?

The difference is that when widespread systemic labor abuses are revealed in a manufacturing industry, people who aren't members of the capitalist class or spokespeople for the firms in the industry have no problem recognizing that the factory workers are victims.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#433

Post by mindslight »

mbrodersen wrote: post #424
mindslight wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

It seems like you willfully misunderstood my argument, as talking about journalists shooting kids is some obvious caricature.

Society is held together by people's values and individual adherence to shared rules - aka culture. Kids, like everyone else (eg cops), are acting out cultural norms, being mostly defined by mass media.

Entertainment media mostly consists of easy-to-write fight scenes where the main characters dispose of some endless supply of nameless "bad guys". A few hits or shots, that one is gone, move on to the next one. No scenes showing henchman #17 hugging his kids goodbye that morning, or henchman #31's parents grieving. Just purely transactional force-of-will violence - sound familiar?

Furthermore, news media then glorifies shooting events when they do happen, showering the perpetrator with attention and making sure they go down in infamy - it's actually a quite precocious way to get one's 15 minutes of fame.

And of course there's that other uncomfortable issue of why school environments cause kids to want to kill their peers in the first place!

But there's no straightforward approaches to those, and they're held in place by entrenched incentives (lazy writing, clickbait advertising, ass-covering school administrators), while the people speaking up for the inanimate objects are easy to write off.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#434

Post by GoblinSlayer »

cbozeman wrote: post #372
Larrikin wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>they wouldn't need to do porn. Why is it such an extremely hard to believe fact that maybe there are people out there that aren't doing it because they are desperate sluts that are failures of society and are actually doing it because its work that they enjoy. Why is working at an injection molding plant making car parts such a better job? Seems extremely boring in comparison. The only real argument to make for it…

> Why is it such an extremely hard to believe fact that maybe there are people out there that aren't doing it because they are desperate sluts that are failures of society and are actually doing it because its work that they enjoy. Probably because we're biologically programmed to understand that's not the case? It boils down to a simple, but true, undeniable - and apparently for a lot of people, unpleasant - maxim f…

Birds had too different evolution, they have roughly equal hard skills, which isn't true for humans. For humans sperm and eggs are entertainment and are quite high on Maslow pyramid, but the lower levels are solved only by men, and women have only eggs to offer in exchange (also developed plumage), and that's how they adapted, for them sex isn't entertainment, but survival, i.e. they are evolutionarily programmed for prostitution. And sex workers do enjoy sex, like everyone. You better make attractiveness of sex work your point.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#435

Post by Johnjonjoan »

cbozeman wrote: post #406
thatcat wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea no one wants to work at walmart and no one wants to shop at walmart, but hey look at how many walmarts there are. When people complain that there are no jobs they mean there are no meaningful careers, not that there aren't enough walmarts to work at.

Yeah, according to Keynes we were all supposed to have 15 hour work weeks by now... makes you wonder what exactly went wrong.

Keynes forgot about greed. He thought after making workers 2.5x more efficient the machine would be happy with still making 1x the product.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#436

Post by tomc1985 »

bonoboTP wrote: post #427
tomc1985 wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 con…

Personally I think it could do without the status and power dynamics. Those other things, sure, as components of intimacy, but ultimately I think it should be about orgasms and babies, and the giving and receiving thereof. I think the giving and receiving of pleasure is an end in and of itself.

In terms of pure thrusting, that is a very narrow view of it. For one thing you're forgetting about sensuality, foreplay, kink, and polyamory, and the immense feeling of satisfaction of blowing off steam that builds up over time.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#438

Post by DanBC »

what2build wrote: post #80
Melting_Harps wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Willingly sell self for pleasure though? Psh Having been in a sector of fintech that many sex workers used, I can say with confidence that the majority of the women within were single moms who simply couldn't or didn't have access to the social net to feed their children and aren't doing it because they want to. It was entirely eye-opening to see how sad it is when you're talking with a young women trying to sell t…

People are hardly working for Google because they want to. People are hardly working in slaughter houses and coal mines because they want to. Feminists I know are selling themselves because they like sex, and controlling their bodies time economy is their choice. One would think on this forum that it’s a gradient of statistics and not black and white anecdotes would be more obvious. Exploitation of minors is one thin…

> Feminists I know are selling themselves because they like sex,

Sex work is the only job where you believe the advertising. "I'm selling a little bit of sex because I have such a high sex drive" or "I love sex and I need to fund my way through college" -- they need to say this because most of their punters do not want to buy sex from people who are poor and desperate for money.

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#439

Post by GoblinSlayer »

Fargren wrote: post #187
computerphage wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know enough to decide with certainty if the post in question is right, but it definitely seems earnest. I believe the poster sincerely holds those beliefs.

People seriously believe being advertised at is "just as much a negative" as the stigma from being a porn actress? I have no appreciation for the advertising industry, but this is hard for me to believe.

I think what was meant is a belief that porn addiction causes brain damage (to the addict).

Re: The Internet Is for Porn

#440

Post by GoblinSlayer »

worik wrote: post #437
Chris2048 wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes.. anything useful to add?

Very useful to tell feminists what they are doing. We are useful by default. They have to prove themselves

It's required by emancipation. Men who didn't prove themselves are useless too. And not only through words, but deeds too.
Post reply on HN