Somethin up wit dat facebook??
I just tried Google+ and god damm when that takes over it will be the worst yet.
All of my web history and contacts are a click away, I can't wait until everyone can access that and Google wins all the court battles saying they are fully in their rights, with the judge then saying - "yes, yes they are".
well no I meant it looks like facebook is down but I dont know if its just me or what
I got on a moment ago, it was fine
nothing wrong "wit dat" facebook for me
Hey guys nevermind found out my problem!
Also I got my trackpad on my Mac fixed!!
!!!
The status update change pissed me off so much that I created a Google+ account. Zuckerberg has lost his fucking mind.
oh i see what's going on now. facebook layout changed.
well, it's not that different really. people complain every time it changes but after a week everyone gets over it.
the worst thing they ever did though was the chat sidebar. but you can turn that off.
one thing that sucks though is that this new update completely broke "better facebook" plugin
actually nevermind, there's an update for it that fixes it
facebook's been hacked by the design team from youtube
I don't think its as bad as everyone is making it out to be...
who gives a shit fuck facebook
Quote from: rtil on September 21, 2011 09:51 AM
broke "better facebook" plugin
thank you for mentioning this
originally i wasn't gonna say anything but i agree w/ the mongoose here.
facebook makes a new layout that everyone hates, people complain, but then eventually end up liking it. the cycle continues
whoa when i made a post it got switched with the first post on the first page
edit: oh nvm my page settings got fucked up somehow :/
Quote from: shura on September 22, 2011 03:59 PM
facebook makes a new layout that everyone hates, people complain, but then eventually end up liking it. the cycle continues
yeah responses on this website and most others are really predictable.
"there is something new about x that i don't like" and after a few weeks they stop complaining about it
then there is the group of people that say "i never liked x to begin with"
then there are people like us who are like "man you guys are so predictable talking about x like that"
this is why the internet gets so tiresome
then there's me and you can licky me dicky
Quote from: trent bortknob on September 22, 2011 04:16 PM
Quote from: shura on September 22, 2011 03:59 PM
facebook makes a new layout that everyone hates, people complain, but then eventually end up liking it. the cycle continues
yeah responses on this website and most others are really predictable.
"there is something new about x that i don't like" and after a few weeks they stop complaining about it
then there is the group of people that say "i never liked x to begin with"
then there are people like us who are like "man you guys are so predictable talking about x like that"
this is why the internet gets so tiresome
this has nothing to do with the internet, though. humans, by nature, generally dislike change. humans live by routine. when their routine is changed in any way, it disrupts what they're comfortable with. because we can, we complain about it. this has happened for thousands of years. it's not the internet you're tired of, it's people.
well the funny part is that people complain, say that facebook sucks, some people even 'demand' things to be changed back or whatever but never really stop to think about that facebook is a 100% free service. if they wanted to put up porno ads, they could, if they wanted to take down facebook, they could.
Quote from: rtil on September 22, 2011 05:42 PM
it's not the internet you're tired of, it's people.
that is very true true.
i do sometimes use "people" and "the internet" interchangeably and that's certainly unfair. the internet shows people who are usually somewhat anonymous and almost always less tactful when speaking than they are in real life. people go online and dump all of their pent up emotions, so in this way it seems like most comments or posts were made by people who didn't think before they spoke.
i do think that real life interaction is very different from internet interaction. there are the obviously physical aspects like the way someone looks, hand gestures, etc, but one thing i think a lot of people forget is that not everyone is on the internet. some of the coolest and most interesting people i've ever met don't have youtube accounts or facebooks.
what i'm getting to with this is that while i may be sick of people in some way, i think i'm more sick of how people act when they use the internet. i think that it is different, people act differently now than they did ten years ago. and if they don't in person, even if in general people act the same now than they did back then, almost everyone acts differently online.
when the internet was not prevailing i was a kid, so a lot of this is just speculation. i have no idea what it's like to be my age at a time that is not dominated by internet activity. i've tried going without the internet for a long time, but as other people can tell you, it's hard. not because i miss the internet that much (ok, i do miss downloading movies and music and watching youtube videos of bands playing live, videos i'd never see without youtube), it's more that once i unplug my internet, i unplug everyone who talks to me except for my girlfriend. during the weeks i go without the internet, i seriously goes days without talking to anybody, not because i don't want to, but because people either don't want to or don't know how to get ahold of me without the internet. that's the main reason i still go online.
Quote from: psi on September 22, 2011 06:11 PM
well the funny part is that people complain, say that facebook sucks, some people even 'demand' things to be changed back or whatever but never really stop to think about that facebook is a 100% free service. if they wanted to put up porno ads, they could, if they wanted to take down facebook, they could.
this is also a funny thing to note. a lot of people think that they're entitled to things that they aren't. they think they're entitled to a facebook page, and maybe they would be if they shelled out money for one, but it's free.
of course that's not limited to the internet. where i work a lot of people complain when the extra stuff that they get isn't given to them. if we're not doing a good job and they take away some extra privileges we had (like listening to music in certain areas while we work), everyone complains about it. as if the extra stuff wasn't "extra", as if they had a right to it.
hey guys let's make a misanthropy thread
Quote from: trent bortknob on September 22, 2011 06:52 PM
Quote from: rtil on September 22, 2011 05:42 PM
it's not the internet you're tired of, it's people.
that is very true true.
i do sometimes use "people" and "the internet" interchangeably and that's certainly unfair. the internet shows people who are usually somewhat anonymous and almost always less tactful when speaking than they are in real life. people go online and dump all of their pent up emotions, so in this way it seems like most comments or posts were made by people who didn't think before they spoke.
i do think that real life interaction is very different from internet interaction. there are the obviously physical aspects like the way someone looks, hand gestures, etc, but one thing i think a lot of people forget is that not everyone is on the internet. some of the coolest and most interesting people i've ever met don't have youtube accounts or facebooks.
what i'm getting to with this is that while i may be sick of people in some way, i think i'm more sick of how people act when they use the internet. i think that it is different, people act differently now than they did ten years ago. and if they don't in person, even if in general people act the same now than they did back then, almost everyone acts differently online.
when the internet was not prevailing i was a kid, so a lot of this is just speculation. i have no idea what it's like to be my age at a time that is not dominated by internet activity. i've tried going without the internet for a long time, but as other people can tell you, it's hard. not because i miss the internet that much (ok, i do miss downloading movies and music and watching youtube videos of bands playing live, videos i'd never see without youtube), it's more that once i unplug my internet, i unplug everyone who talks to me except for my girlfriend. during the weeks i go without the internet, i seriously goes days without talking to anybody, not because i don't want to, but because people either don't want to or don't know how to get ahold of me without the internet. that's the main reason i still go online.
that's just the direction society is going in, and it won't stop unless some catastrophic loss of infrastructure happens and we are forced out of using technology.
you probably think some of the most interesting people you've met lack social networking accounts because you directly correlate those sites with the people who use them that annoy you. most people use them for attention, to talk about how boring their lives are, they just can't help but broadcast every menial task they perform. but i honestly don't think there's any direct correlation. you just look in the wrong places, or are paying attention to only the parts that you don't like.
you shouldn't try and force yourself to live without modern advances in technology just because you see other people doing it. yes, you can survive without it, but to what effect? honestly, the internet has improved life and the world more than we will understand for the time being. to cast it aside because you only see the negative in it is stupid.
i'm not afraid to admit it. i can't live without the internet. not just because most of my social interaction happens online (even with real life friends who have moved away), but because all my revenue is generated from online activity. my very being centers around it. and i do not care. i enjoy it and i embrace it.
Quote from: rtil on September 22, 2011 07:24 PM
Quote from: trent bortknob on September 22, 2011 06:52 PM
Quote from: rtil on September 22, 2011 05:42 PM
it's not the internet you're tired of, it's people.
that is very true true.
i do sometimes use "people" and "the internet" interchangeably and that's certainly unfair. the internet shows people who are usually somewhat anonymous and almost always less tactful when speaking than they are in real life. people go online and dump all of their pent up emotions, so in this way it seems like most comments or posts were made by people who didn't think before they spoke.
i do think that real life interaction is very different from internet interaction. there are the obviously physical aspects like the way someone looks, hand gestures, etc, but one thing i think a lot of people forget is that not everyone is on the internet. some of the coolest and most interesting people i've ever met don't have youtube accounts or facebooks.
what i'm getting to with this is that while i may be sick of people in some way, i think i'm more sick of how people act when they use the internet. i think that it is different, people act differently now than they did ten years ago. and if they don't in person, even if in general people act the same now than they did back then, almost everyone acts differently online.
when the internet was not prevailing i was a kid, so a lot of this is just speculation. i have no idea what it's like to be my age at a time that is not dominated by internet activity. i've tried going without the internet for a long time, but as other people can tell you, it's hard. not because i miss the internet that much (ok, i do miss downloading movies and music and watching youtube videos of bands playing live, videos i'd never see without youtube), it's more that once i unplug my internet, i unplug everyone who talks to me except for my girlfriend. during the weeks i go without the internet, i seriously goes days without talking to anybody, not because i don't want to, but because people either don't want to or don't know how to get ahold of me without the internet. that's the main reason i still go online.
that's just the direction society is going in, and it won't stop unless some catastrophic loss of infrastructure happens and we are forced out of using technology.
you probably think some of the most interesting people you've met lack social networking accounts because you directly correlate those sites with the people who use them that annoy you. most people use them for attention, to talk about how boring their lives are, they just can't help but broadcast every menial task they perform. but i honestly don't think there's any direct correlation. you just look in the wrong places, or are paying attention to only the parts that you don't like.
you shouldn't try and force yourself to live without modern advances in technology just because you see other people doing it. yes, you can survive without it, but to what effect? honestly, the internet has improved life and the world more than we will understand for the time being. to cast it aside because you only see the negative in it is stupid.
i'm not afraid to admit it. i can't live without the internet. not just because most of my social interaction happens online (even with real life friends who have moved away), but because all my revenue is generated from online activity. my very being centers around it. and i do not care. i enjoy it and i embrace it.
the reason i think that some of the most people i've ever met lack social networking accounts is because they DO lack social networking accounts. it's not like i just imagine that it's true, i've asked them and talked to them about social networking sites. and while many of them probably go to youtube, they don't have accounts there.
but that isn't the point, really. even if every single person in the world had a facebook or used a social networking site, that wouldn't mean that it is a good thing to have or use. i don't care if my idols or my parents or all of my best friends have one, that doesn't mean that i, or any one else should get one. so that's not part of my reasoning.
now, i do make the jump from "social networking sites" to "the internet/modern technology", and you followed me on this with your third paragraph. obviously, these are two separate things, i can live without social networking and still use modern technology. my stance is that i'm a bit skeptical of a lot of modern technology that is centered around use of the internet, and the internet itself, as i see that it causes a lot of wasted time, meaningless relationships, and an overall detachment from the physical happenings of the world.
is this completely true, or always absolutely true for everyone? probably not, but i'm still skeptical. i'm not going to go out and say "the internet is bad, here is why" because i'm not strong enough in my convictions yet, i just think that i'm noticing a pattern here.
there have been a few weeks where i would just unplug the internet unless i absolutely needed it (check work schedule, check bank account, etc). (i know i don't ABSOLUTELY need to do those things online, but this is for a different discussion). those weeks have been fairly productive, i usually have a lot more time and spend a lot more time doing things like reading and writing music. i don't have a t.v. so that is also eliminated as a time waster. and at one point, a friend of mine took a week off online as well, so we ended up hanging out a lot. this doesn't prove anything, but it makes it seem like the internet might be causing us to spend less time around each other. when we both unplugged, we magically had plenty of time to hang out.
then there are other aspects of the use of the internet that seem potentially unsatisfactory, but instead of typing those i'll let you watch this video,
i might sound like a hippie, but at this point i'm really wanting to avoid needing too many "things" to live. obviously you'll always need food and shelter and stuff, and i'll always need things like social interaction, probably musical instruments, other people's music, films, etc etc. but it'd be nice to not NEED the internet, whether its for social interactions or for money.
gah, so much text with nothing to with a the original post
and a side note, after some consideration i do think that the internet could be doing a lot of good. the problem is, i don't really think that's it being used for the right reasons or being used properly for the most part. there is a lot of information on the internet, and the internet has helped to expand my musical horizons, to meet new people, to hear about a lot of things i would probably never have heard about otherwise (the whole "new atheism" movement for example). but most of the time people use it to bitch and moan to a larger amount of people, to look up pornography, to steal things easily, and as yet another escape from reality (there have been a lot of those since long before the internet, we don't need any more).
http://www.internetisshit.org/ (http://www.internetisshit.org/)
Quote from: trent bortknob on September 22, 2011 08:40 PM
the reason i think that some of the most people i've ever met lack social networking accounts is because they DO lack social networking accounts. it's not like i just imagine that it's true, i've asked them and talked to them about social networking sites. and while many of them probably go to youtube, they don't have accounts there.
but that isn't the point, really. even if every single person in the world had a facebook or used a social networking site, that wouldn't mean that it is a good thing to have or use. i don't care if my idols or my parents or all of my best friends have one, that doesn't mean that i, or any one else should get one. so that's not part of my reasoning.
i don't think you understood what i was saying. i was making the point that "having a social networking account" and "being an interesting person" are not ever mutually exclusive or separate.
social networking can be a good or bad thing depending on how it's used. it's never black and white. that's all.
Quotenow, i do make the jump from "social networking sites" to "the internet/modern technology", and you followed me on this with your third paragraph. obviously, these are two separate things, i can live without social networking and still use modern technology. my stance is that i'm a bit skeptical of a lot of modern technology that is centered around use of the internet, and the internet itself, as i see that it causes a lot of wasted time, meaningless relationships, and an overall detachment from the physical happenings of the world.
is this completely true, or always absolutely true for everyone? probably not, but i'm still skeptical. i'm not going to go out and say "the internet is bad, here is why" because i'm not strong enough in my convictions yet, i just think that i'm noticing a pattern here.
though you might not want to admit it, when you are interacting with anyone in any way with a piece of communications technology, you are socially networking in some fashion. the depth of it varies, but that's just a fact.
yeah, people waste time on the internet. that's one variable to human life that hardly correlates with how productive we are as a society. why do we waste time? there's a lot of reasons for that, and you can't blame one thing for it. if the internet wasn't around, people would waste their time doing arguably worse things.
Quote
there have been a few weeks where i would just unplug the internet unless i absolutely needed it (check work schedule, check bank account, etc). (i know i don't ABSOLUTELY need to do those things online, but this is for a different discussion). those weeks have been fairly productive, i usually have a lot more time and spend a lot more time doing things like reading and writing music. i don't have a t.v. so that is also eliminated as a time waster. and at one point, a friend of mine took a week off online as well, so we ended up hanging out a lot. this doesn't prove anything, but it makes it seem like the internet might be causing us to spend less time around each other. when we both unplugged, we magically had plenty of time to hang out.
then there are other aspects of the use of the internet that seem potentially unsatisfactory, but instead of typing those i'll let you watch this video,
a television cannot be compared to the utility of a wired computer.. i'm not even going to entertain that. but yea, if your hobbies and work don't involve the computer, and you're on the computer all the time, you're not going to get anything done. and when that distraction is no longer available to you, you look for other distractions - like hanging out with friends. you're still wasting time, you just pin more value to it because it's something people do less often now.
btw, to embed youtube videos now you just paste the link to the video.
Quote
i might sound like a hippie, but at this point i'm really wanting to avoid needing too many "things" to live. obviously you'll always need food and shelter and stuff, and i'll always need things like social interaction, probably musical instruments, other people's music, films, etc etc. but it'd be nice to not NEED the internet, whether its for social interactions or for money.
you seem to not want to need it simply because most people
do, as if you have something to prove. like i'm less of a person than you for needing it for what i do.
Quote from: trent bortknob on September 22, 2011 08:45 PM
and a side note, after some consideration i do think that the internet could be doing a lot of good. the problem is, i don't really think that's it being used for the right reasons or being used properly for the most part. there is a lot of information on the internet, and the internet has helped to expand my musical horizons, to meet new people, to hear about a lot of things i would probably never have heard about otherwise (the whole "new atheism" movement for example). but most of the time people use it to bitch and moan to a larger amount of people, to look up pornography, to steal things easily, and as yet another escape from reality (there have been a lot of those since long before the internet, we don't need any more).
escaping from reality is actually a very good thing.. i'm not sure why you'd think this was bad. every normal human being experiences this, be it through games, film, music, art, pick a hobby of your choice. everyone needs a break from life or we'd all go insane and kill eachother.
i also don't see how pornography is a negative thing either. pornography has been around since the dawn of man, we are sexual creatures and that's normal. nothing to really be ashamed of about that. i mean really, don't try and pretend you don't look at it/don't masturbate just like everyone else.
and as far as the rest of it goes, there's always going to be good with the bad. no one forces you to read or look at vlogs and comment sections of stupid website with people bickering with eachother over stupid things.
the internet has done so much good for the world, society and technology there's too much to list or count.
Quote from: redmongoose on September 22, 2011 08:51 PM
http://www.internetisshit.org/ (http://www.internetisshit.org/)
this was a very unbiased review of the subject at hand. i learned a lot!
a lot of what you said is talked about in the video i linked you to.
it's not like i'm condemning you for anything. i hope you're not taking what i'm saying as a sort of personal attack, i don't mean it that way.
Quote from: rtil on September 22, 2011 09:41 PM
i also don't see how pornography is a negative thing either. pornography has been around since the dawn of man, we are sexual creatures and that's normal. nothing to really be ashamed of about that. i mean really, don't try and pretend you don't look at it/don't masturbate just like everyone else.
this is the only thing that i disagree with fully. i don't look at pornography, and while yes, i masturbate like everyone else, i don't need pornography to do so. i don't care if pornography has been around since the dawn of man, so has murder and slavery. yes, we are sexual creatures, and that helps us reproduce.
tell me one good reason to watch pornography. i can't think of any, really. i can, however, think of reasons not to look at pornography.
1. it is using another person or persons. the people in pornography become vehicles to your pleasure. they are not people who you respect or value.
2. it's unrealistic. pornography (usually) sets an unnaturally high bar for women and what their physical appearances should be. not only that, but sex as displayed by pornography is not what sex actually is like. (you could argue something like "cartoons don't mirror the real world, should we not watch those either?" but that is not the same, as porn is supposed to supply you with sexual fulfillment, as a replacement to the actual act itself. at least, that's my understanding.)
3. it can often be misogynistic, though that depends on the porn you're watching.
4. the whole genre is making money off of people's lust.
5. almost all sex in porn is even lower than casual sex (another thing that i take issue with), because it's done for money. it's on the level of prostitution in a way.
all of this makes me think that we'd all probably be a lot better off without it. though i don't think i'm going to change anyone's mind about this, this is why i don't watch it.
however, don't confuse these topics about ethics to be related to legality. i 100% think porn should be legal, as well as all drugs. just to clear things up.
Quote from: trent bortknob on September 22, 2011 10:25 PM
a lot of what you said is talked about in the video i linked you to.
it's not like i'm condemning you for anything. i hope you're not taking what i'm saying as a sort of personal attack, i don't mean it that way.
honestly i watched about a minute of it and got really bored. i'll give it another shot later tonight when i'm not so busy.
Quote
this is the only thing that i disagree with fully. i don't look at pornography, and while yes, i masturbate like everyone else, i don't need pornography to do so. i don't care if pornography has been around since the dawn of man, so has murder and slavery. yes, we are sexual creatures, and that helps us reproduce.
what the hell kind of logic is that? you're condemning pornography by baseless association? this doesn't help your point. anyway, yeah, you can get your rocks off without it, because males are far more sexually charged than women (a great argument against "intelligent design" by the way)
Quote
tell me one good reason to watch pornography. i can't think of any, really.
it's a catalyst to a release of tension in the male body. that's the only reason i can think of, and there's nothing wrong with it.
Quote
i can, however, think of reasons not to look at pornography.
1. it is using another person or persons. the people in pornography become vehicles to your pleasure. they are not people who you respect or value.
the people in pornography chose to be in that profession. how they got there and why they do it is none of my business, and chances are they don't want or care for my respect, and they're clearly not looking for it.
Quote
2. it's unrealistic. pornography (usually) sets an unnaturally high bar for women and what their physical appearances should be. not only that, but sex as displayed by pornography is not what sex actually is like. (you could argue something like "cartoons don't mirror the real world, should we not watch those either?" but that is not the same, as porn is supposed to supply you with sexual fulfillment, as a replacement to the actual act itself. at least, that's my understanding.)
then you represent the flawed understanding that belongs to people who can't separate reality from fantasy.
Quote
3. it can often be misogynistic, though that depends on the porn you're watching.
then this point is relative and moot.
Quote
4. the whole genre is making money off of people's lust.
and?
Quote
5. almost all sex in porn is even lower than casual sex (another thing that i take issue with), because it's done for money. it's on the level of prostitution in a way.
legally speaking, porn is - by definition - acting.
Quote
all of this makes me think that we'd all probably be a lot better off without it. though i don't think i'm going to change anyone's mind about this, this is why i don't watch it.
however, don't confuse these topics about ethics to be related to legality. i 100% think porn should be legal, as well as all drugs. just to clear things up.
it seems to me that you are leaning strongly on your second point, that porn gives men an unrealistic portrait of what sex is supposed to be like, and saps women of self-confidence. and again, i will say that if someone is unable to separate online pornography with their sex life and physical appearance, they are struggling with knowing what is reality and what is fantasy. and porn is hardly the main catalyst of society's unrealistic image of women. it mostly comes from casual media. tv, magazines, diets, celebrities, etc. in pornography it's really more about catering to personal preferences instead of one single "ideal" female image.
i also find your moral standings on this issue a bit strange. you come off as a religious person would instead of an atheist.
i dont think i can live without internet, but i can definitely live without facebook.
nothing wrong with using it, i just personally hate the spam, advertisements, shitty apps, and the never-ending installment of useless and broken features
also there's nothing wrong with porn, but you gotta admit that some of the shit you find online is really fucking twisted and disgusting. ie 2 girls 1 cup
i dunno if i'd call 2girls1cup porn.. but i'm sure it is to someone out there
everything is porn to at least 1 person online
I don't really like people being able to see where I'm at or what I'm doing. Which is why I deleted mine.
In the future online dating will probably be on the main social netoworking site you chat to you mom with. That's not good at all.
Quote from: rtil on September 22, 2011 11:31 PM
honestly i watched about a minute of it and got really bored. i'll give it another shot later tonight when i'm not so busy.
i think it's a good vid but i mean if it bores you, you probably won't take it seriously so whatever.
Quote
what the hell kind of logic is that? you're condemning pornography by baseless association? this doesn't help your point. anyway, yeah, you can get your rocks off without it, because males are far more sexually charged than women (a great argument against "intelligent design" by the way)
you seemed to miss the point here. you claimed that "pornography has been around since the dawn of man, we are sexual creatures and that's normal." as if because it is old, it is somehow good. that is baseless. the only correlation i was making with murder and slavery with pornography is that they've all been around a long time, so just because something is old doesn't mean it's good. it also doesn't mean that it's bad, it just means that there is no absolute correlation between the age of a practice and its ethical consequences.
Quote
it's a catalyst to a release of tension in the male body. that's the only reason i can think of, and there's nothing wrong with it.
it's not necessary at best, but i'll get to this later.
Quote
the people in pornography chose to be in that profession. how they got there and why they do it is none of my business, and chances are they don't want or care for my respect, and they're clearly not looking for it.
that's a fine defense for the qualities of a porn star, and works fine in an apologist way for defending a porn star's character. it doesn't mean that porn itself is actually a good thing or that it's even permissible. i'm not claiming that they're looking for your respect or for anyone's, at all. what i'm saying is that the actor becomes a means to someone else's ends and not a means in themselves. this is what it means to be used for something, to become dehumanized. is there nothing wrong with that? i think there is, regardless of whether or not anyone consents to it.
Quote
then you represent the flawed understanding that belongs to people who can't separate reality from fantasy.
how so? i obviously can tell the difference, that's why i made the point that i did.
this particular point would be a lot stronger if i had some scientific or psychological evidence that suggested a real life correlation between watching porn and how people view women/how well their relationships turn out. i do not have that right now, so i will admit that my point is not the strongest, as it's mainly based on my own observation. however, even if this point is completely taken away it doesn't make the case FOR pornography much stronger.
Quote
then this point is relative and moot.
not necessarily. it would just mean that certain types of porn are bad, which would mean you couldn't claim "there's nothing wrong with porn". you'd have to change it to something like "there is porn that is not bad".
Quote
and?
if you honestly don't see anything wrong with exploiting people's emotions for profit then i don't think you'll ever understand the basics of ethics.
Quote
legally speaking, porn is - by definition - acting.
this is probably your strongest point, honestly. i don't really have a good response to this. i guess the best i can think of is that pornography is not viewed in the same ways that plays and movies are. also, the acting in porn is almost always mediocre, and then they have sex, which probably just requires a bit of "faking it".
if nothing else, porn is not very high brow entertainment. (that was supposed to be funny, not an argument. just saying because i didn't want you to actually respond to that).
Quote
it seems to me that you are leaning strongly on your second point, that porn gives men an unrealistic portrait of what sex is supposed to be like, and saps women of self-confidence. and again, i will say that if someone is unable to separate online pornography with their sex life and physical appearance, they are struggling with knowing what is reality and what is fantasy. and porn is hardly the main catalyst of society's unrealistic image of women. it mostly comes from casual media. tv, magazines, diets, celebrities, etc. in pornography it's really more about catering to personal preferences instead of one single "ideal" female image.
that is actually true. but, i also think all of those things you listed are bad, so that doesn't really go against my point, it just adds a whole new discussion that could be had.
another potential problem i had was that porn creates a sort of hyper-sexuality where real life encounters and physical attraction to other people becomes diminished. (i've actually seen this happen in people, but i'm not going to say their names for privacy reasons.)
all of this aside, i still don't see any particular reason that anyone should use porn. it certainly is unnecessary, and it's probably only a necessity for people who are used to or addicted to using it.
Quote
i also find your moral standings on this issue a bit strange. you come off as a religious person would instead of an atheist.
i actually get this quite a lot. i've had numerous discussions with people and a lot of them ask me if i'm religious, and when they find out i'm an atheist their heads explode.
a lot of times, you hear religious fanatics going on and on about the moral implications of this and that. and a lot of times, you just want them to chill the fuck out and shut up. i totally get this, but this is because all of the claims that they're making are based a moral code prescribed by an 2,000 year old collection of desert scribblings that promotes total barbarism. if they were actually taking offense based on reason, logic and human compassion, it might not be so annoying.
i take morality seriously, because what we do and how we act is pretty much the most important part of our lives. it defines who we are, so for me, it's really important to try and think through every conceivable moral stance, and so far, this is where i'm at with porn. i'm also easily confused with a religious person because of my stance on casual sex, though i certainly don't agree with the religious rite when it comes to issues like gay marriage and drug legalization.
one thing that other people think is that i'm a judgmental condescending person, but this isn't true. while it is true that i try to determine what is moral, and a lot of times this is at ends with other people's moral judgments (or lack thereof, more often than not), i don't judge PEOPLE as immoral, i judge actions that way. and with some stuff like porn and casual sex, i'm not going to freak out if you do it, because for me it's not a big deal. i still think it's bad, but i know that it doesn't really hurt anyone (except yourself, and the fact that you're supporting it helps the industry thrive, which arguably hurts other people). so don't think i'm walking away from the discussion thinking "oh man, that rtil is a bad dude". i don't think of things in total black and white.
Quote
you seemed to miss the point here. you claimed that "pornography has been around since the dawn of man, we are sexual creatures and that's normal." as if because it is old, it is somehow good. that is baseless. the only correlation i was making with murder and slavery with pornography is that they've all been around a long time, so just because something is old doesn't mean it's good. it also doesn't mean that it's bad, it just means that there is no absolute correlation between the age of a practice and its ethical consequences.
i never said that it was good because it was old. you're just putting words in my mouth.
my point was that it's human nature, and you can't fight it.
Quote
that's a fine defense for the qualities of a porn star, and works fine in an apologist way for defending a porn star's character. it doesn't mean that porn itself is actually a good thing or that it's even permissible. i'm not claiming that they're looking for your respect or for anyone's, at all. what i'm saying is that the actor becomes a means to someone else's ends and not a means in themselves. this is what it means to be used for something, to become dehumanized. is there nothing wrong with that? i think there is, regardless of whether or not anyone consents to it.
i don't find anything dehumanizing in it. humans have sex all the time.
Quote
how so? i obviously can tell the difference, that's why i made the point that i did.
i think you can and you're just playing stupid for the sake of your weak argument. that or you're a virgin.
Quote
this particular point would be a lot stronger if i had some scientific or psychological evidence that suggested a real life correlation between watching porn and how people view women/how well their relationships turn out. i do not have that right now, so i will admit that my point is not the strongest, as it's mainly based on my own observation. however, even if this point is completely taken away it doesn't make the case FOR pornography much stronger.
why does there need to be a
case for pornography? it's a natural byproduct of human desires.
Quote
not necessarily. it would just mean that certain types of porn are bad, which would mean you couldn't claim "there's nothing wrong with porn". you'd have to change it to something like "there is porn that is not bad".
porn is acting with the consent of all the actors. if the consent isn't there, it isn't porn anymore.
Quote
if you honestly don't see anything wrong with exploiting people's emotions for profit then i don't think you'll ever understand the basics of ethics.
i would argue there are little to no emotions involved in the filming of pornography. and please, spare me the "basics of ethics". morality has nothing to do with this.
Quote
this is probably your strongest point, honestly. i don't really have a good response to this. i guess the best i can think of is that pornography is not viewed in the same ways that plays and movies are. also, the acting in porn is almost always mediocre, and then they have sex, which probably just requires a bit of "faking it".
then by that reasoning, they are good actors.
Quote
that is actually true. but, i also think all of those things you listed are bad, so that doesn't really go against my point, it just adds a whole new discussion that could be had.
another potential problem i had was that porn creates a sort of hyper-sexuality where real life encounters and physical attraction to other people becomes diminished. (i've actually seen this happen in people, but i'm not going to say their names for privacy reasons.)
all of this aside, i still don't see any particular reason that anyone should use porn. it certainly is unnecessary, and it's probably only a necessity for people who are used to or addicted to using it.
once again i get the feeling you use this "i don't watch porn and anyone who does has a problem" as a way to make yourself feel superior to other people. the majority of adult males with access to pornography watch pornography. it's a normal thing, it's a healthy thing, it's a natural thing. your only perspective is that people who do watch it are inferior and are prone to some sort of psychological disorder. well it works both ways. most sex crimes are committed by sexually repressed people, especially ones who force themselves to inhibit their natural desires, like masturbating. you know, like celibate priests, who have a good long history of raping minors.
the reason people "use" porn is due to a chemical reaction in your brain. it happens to me, it happens to you, it happens to everyone.
Quote
i actually get this quite a lot. i've had numerous discussions with people and a lot of them ask me if i'm religious, and when they find out i'm an atheist their heads explode.
a lot of times, you hear religious fanatics going on and on about the moral implications of this and that. and a lot of times, you just want them to chill the fuck out and shut up. i totally get this, but this is because all of the claims that they're making are based a moral code prescribed by an 2,000 year old collection of desert scribblings that promotes total barbarism. if they were actually taking offense based on reason, logic and human compassion, it might not be so annoying.
i take morality seriously, because what we do and how we act is pretty much the most important part of our lives. it defines who we are, so for me, it's really important to try and think through every conceivable moral stance, and so far, this is where i'm at with porn. i'm also easily confused with a religious person because of my stance on casual sex, though i certainly don't agree with the religious rite when it comes to issues like gay marriage and drug legalization.
well i don't find your position very reasonable
or logical, so that's why it probably reminds me (and others) of religion.
Quote
one thing that other people think is that i'm a judgmental condescending person, but this isn't true. while it is true that i try to determine what is moral, and a lot of times this is at ends with other people's moral judgments (or lack thereof, more often than not), i don't judge PEOPLE as immoral, i judge actions that way. and with some stuff like porn and casual sex, i'm not going to freak out if you do it, because for me it's not a big deal. i still think it's bad, but i know that it doesn't really hurt anyone (except yourself, and the fact that you're supporting it helps the industry thrive, which arguably hurts other people). so don't think i'm walking away from the discussion thinking "oh man, that rtil is a bad dude". i don't think of things in total black and white.
this is another typical religious spin on the "i have the moral high ground" arguments that i hear a lot from theists. kind of like the "you're not a bad person, but you're still going to hell" kind of thing. sorry, i just don't' buy it.
there needs to be a case for pornography because there needs to be a case for EVERYTHING. and even if you deny that, i think that pornography raises some obvious red flags.
the whole "you're not a bad person but you're still going to hell" is COMPLETELY different that what i am talking about! the fact that you'd compare them astounds me. one is the vein attempt of a religious fanatic to be both socially acceptable and true to her incredibly archaic and demanding faith. the other side (my side) is an admission of uncertainty. i'm still working out my moral understandings, i don't think i have them all totally figured out. like in science, every answer opens a hundred new questions. the other thing is that, i know that at the end, we're all just going to die anyway, so with certain actions like casual sex and porn, that really don't have much of an effect on me, i don't go around pushing people not to do it. i can still think "hey it's probably bad and i'm not going to do it", and i may even talk to some people about it if it comes up, but it doesn't affect me in any way if people do it, so in this way it's a sort of mini-dilemma. it's more of a "food-for-thought" thing than a practical thing. so because it's not something i'm 100% sure of, and because it's something that doesn't really effect me, i'm withholding judgment of other people who do it, even though i personally think that it is probably not something that anyone OUGHT to do. i don't see how this is anything like the condemnation of something like a religious nut does.
it's not true that i think that people who watch porn have psychological issues. i think that they're probably making a bad decision. you're seriously over emphasizing the strength of my position here, and this is where you are putting words in my mouth. also, i definitely understand how dangerous repressed sexuality is. sex and sexuality are obviously natural, repressing them is silly. mormonism condemns sexuality and prohibits showing any skin. however, it's also e religion in which there is a ton of sexual violence and rape amongst followers. go figure.
the main differences in our thinking is that you see pornography as the natural product of our sexual desires, whereas i see the natural product as...sex. there is a difference between having a mate and reproducing (or just "making love" for enjoyment) and filming people having sex and then having people watch it (for a fee) in order to feed their sexual urges by using the people and the content as a vehicle for pleasure. when you're in a loving relationship and you have sex, the person is not just someone who you use for pleasure, she's an end in herself (also it's a lot more fun this way). this is not true with pornography.
it's like talking to a wall on some of these issues. if the basis for every argument you make is based on a priori assumptions then nothing i could ever say that disagrees with you would ever be considered valid. this is not the proper way to have a debate (this is the tactic that a lot of theists use, by the way, if we're going to constantly compare each other to theists as an attempt to discredit each other).
and the other thing is that you're seemingly coming to this argument with preconceived negative notions. this is obvious because half of the time you're sensing hostility that isn't there and are acting defensive. it's hard to debate in this way. when you come up and just assume that i want to feel superior to people or that i'm putting words in your mouth to try to attack you, this gets really exhausting. where exactly do you get the idea that i do or want to feel superior to other people?
tbh i think you have a built up view of me that is preventing you from having a fair discussion. you seem to be on the defensive and are totally hardening my stances and making them seem way more extreme than they actually are. contrary to what you're saying, i'm not the one who only has one perspective. you seem to be seeing me in a certain lens that filters everything i say in a certain way. this is apparent when you seem to draw completely different conclusions than the ones i'm suggesting with my arguments.
oh and for clarification i'm not a virgin. i didn't want to say this before because i didn't want people to think i was "bragging" or something like that, but because it was questioned i figured i'd cleat that up.
well you probably don't realize it but you come off as presuming yourself as having the superior moral high ground. why else would i assume that you were? i'm not putting words in your mouth, i'm interpreting what you've said. how it looks to you looks different to me and everyone else.
for example, again, you said this:
Quote
i don't judge PEOPLE as immoral, i judge actions that way. and with some stuff like porn and casual sex, i'm not going to freak out if you do it, because for me it's not a big deal. i still think it's bad, but i know that it doesn't really hurt anyone (except yourself, and the fact that you're supporting it helps the industry thrive, which arguably hurts other people)
which basically means you're saying "i don't think you're a bad person, i just judge what you do, and you do things i think are morally wrong that are hurting you and other people." so then what, do you feel sorry for me? how does that not make me a bad person in your eyes? does that make me a stupid person? does that make you morally superior to me? if you judge me based on my actions, then you are indirectly judging me as a person, and there's no way around it, sorry.
Quotethe main differences in our thinking is that you see pornography as the natural product of our sexual desires, whereas i see the natural product as...sex. there is a difference between having a mate and reproducing (or just "making love" for enjoyment) and filming people having sex and then having people watch it (for a fee) in order to feed their sexual urges by using the people and the content as a vehicle for pleasure. when you're in a loving relationship and you have sex, the person is not just someone who you use for pleasure, she's an end in herself (also it's a lot more fun this way). this is not true with pornography.
well maybe in your bizarre world your girlfriend just happens to be around and horny every time you wanna beat off, people obviously can't have sex
every time they're feeling like it. look at it this way - sex is a fancy 5 star dinner and porn is like fast food. they're both good, but the 5 star meal is way better. but you really can't have the fancy meal all the time, so you settle for the fast food a lot. so i like to watch porn when i masturbate sometimes - FOR FREE by the way, do you really think i'm dumb enough that i can't find free porn on the internet - it just makes the job faster. nobody was "hurt", i move on with my life. if i was really hurting myself, i'd be in some sad psychological state by now. i found out i could do this when i was 12 or something. but somehow 13 years down the line i have a wife, a nice apartment, money, friends, a degree, etc.
unless i am wrong somehow. please, explain to me, how am i hurting myself. teach me.
Quoteand the other thing is that you're seemingly coming to this argument with preconceived negative notions. this is obvious because half of the time you're sensing hostility that isn't there and are acting defensive. it's hard to debate in this way. when you come up and just assume that i want to feel superior to people or that i'm putting words in your mouth to try to attack you, this gets really exhausting. where exactly do you get the idea that i do or want to feel superior to other people?
tbh i think you have a built up view of me that is preventing you from having a fair discussion. you seem to be on the defensive and are totally hardening my stances and making them seem way more extreme than they actually are. contrary to what you're saying, i'm not the one who only has one perspective. you seem to be seeing me in a certain lens that filters everything i say in a certain way. this is apparent when you seem to draw completely different conclusions than the ones i'm suggesting with my arguments.
i can't help that you put words in my mouth so i had to point it out. and now you're trying to use that against me now that i've brought it up, so, don't act like i'm the only one "attacking" you.
i get the idea that you need to feel superior to others because you
act like someone who does. you take almost everything seriously, have a seemingly non-existant sense of humor, and make a point to be the exact antithesis of everyone else around you for nebulous reasons.
i've presented a lot of points to you, but the only thing you continue to harp on is that porn is morally wrong and hurts the viewer and the actors based on your own set of personal beliefs. and you act all surprised when i continue to compare your argument to a theists.. really?
Quote from: rtil on September 23, 2011 07:34 PM
well you probably don't realize it but you come off as presuming yourself as having the superior moral high ground. why else would i assume that you were? i'm not putting words in your mouth, i'm interpreting what you've said. how it looks to you looks different to me and everyone else.
it probably comes off that way because i'm not claiming morality is relative to culture or opinion, so because i'm expressing an opinion on the basis that it might actually be somewhat true, it comes off as offensive. at least, that's probably what it is.
one thing you have to understand is that i don't engage it debates about morality in order to prove myself
right, i do it in order to prove myself
wrong. if i'm wrong about something, that's a good thing, it means that i have now learned something new and rid myself of an untrue belief. i don't assume i have the "moral high ground" (as you like to say), because then i would not be learning anything, and that's no way to enter into a debate, or live your life in general.
Quote
which basically means you're saying "i don't think you're a bad person, i just judge what you do, and you do things i think are morally wrong that are hurting you and other people." so then what, do you feel sorry for me? how does that not make me a bad person in your eyes? does that make me a stupid person? does that make you morally superior to me? if you judge me based on my actions, then you are indirectly judging me as a person, and there's no way around it, sorry.
no, that's not what it means. what i mean when i say that i don't judge people is that people are too complex and have too many sides for you to ever conclusively judge them good or bad. you can never know a person inside and out, you can never know everything that they think and do. also, they can change over time. people can be selfish, violent, and irresponsible, and totally change in the course of their lives. so, i never say that i think that someone is a bad person, because that would imply that i have a very large amount of knowledge of another person that is pretty much impossible to have.
the only person that i could every comfortably call bad is myself, because i know what i think and do at all hours of the day.
and the thing is, if you're listening, i explained why i don't judge people for having casual sex and watching porn, as well as doing drugs and drinking. i think that probably, we could live without all of those things, and that they probably cause unnecessary problems in our lives, and lives that consist of those activities are also probably not the best possible lives for humans to live. however, in a very real and practical sense, casual sex between two consenting partners and watching pornography that was created by consenting people does no harm to anyone directly, so i admit that judgment of whether or not they are right or wrong is, for most people, irrelevant (or at least insignificant). only for people like me do these topics matter, because i try to take many moral considerations into account. because of that, i don't really go around thinking "rtil watches porn sometimes. that means he is a bad person." or "rtil has had casual sex. that activity was immoral and now he will suffer".
i'm defining good and bad, right and wrong, moral and immoral, etc, simply as what you should and should not do. it doesn't necessarily entail any punishment. so then how can we claim that it is wrong or immoral in this sense? this is a totally different discussion, and it is based on value judgments and how we make them.
these moral claims are certainly harder to support than other claims. for example, you probably should not have incestual relationships. why? because it really IS unnatural and children who are born of incest almost always have some sort of birth defect. there's the consequence, there's the cause, easily made argument.
but for things like porn and casual sex, what are the negative consequences? this is where the arguments really do get more complex. i'm convinced the consequences of both of those actions are that you end up using a person or group of persons in the process. and what's wrong with that? well, probably a lot of things. mainly, using a person as a means to an end instead of an end in herself is dehumanizing. kant refers to this as one of the categorical imperatives.
assuming that god doesn't exist (and i hope that is a safe assumption to make here), is there any problem with dehumanizing people? (if god did exist, the case against it would be much easier to make. however, we're not trying to work with fantasy here) we have to assert what is wrong with an action before calling it immoral, not afterwards. so, what exactly is wrong with it?
i can think of a couple of things. first of all, if you think of what you should not do based upon what you would not want to have done to you (the golden rule basically. please don't compare me to a theist for this, because the golden rule predates any biblical teachings by hundred of years and is an easily used and convenient guide to the everyday ethical dilemma.), you can probably assert that you don't want people to view you as an object, or to use you for any end (regardless of what it is). i'm assuming that you'd prefer it if people treated you like you have value, not that you're just a tool for them to use to gain whatever it is that they want. you want to be treated like a human being.
secondly, you can point to what dehumanization leads to. whether this is genocide or record companies making an example of a person in order to scare people away from illegal downloading, it happens under this mindset. this is viewing people as less than people, and specifically in the record company's case, using someone for their own ends. that company doesn't value the life of that woman who they charged several million dollars for a handful of downloaded songs. they don't give a fuck about her, they're using her as a way to prevent losing money.
i don't want to treat a person as if they're less than anyone else. because of this, i don't use pornography, because the whole thing is based on the idea of using someone as a vehicle to your pleasure.
am i saying that there is a link between pornography and genocide? hardly. what i'm saying is that they both require dehumanization and a lack of respect for other people (albeit by vastly varying degrees).
if it were totally necessary to use pornography in order to masturbate, then i would just say "well, it looks bad, but i guess it just is what it is". but i know for a fact that it is not necessary, regardless of whether or not it is bad.
Quote
well maybe in your bizarre world your girlfriend just happens to be around and horny every time you wanna beat off, people obviously can't have sex every time they're feeling like it. look at it this way - sex is a fancy 5 star dinner and porn is like fast food. they're both good, but the 5 star meal is way better. but you really can't have the fancy meal all the time, so you settle for the fast food a lot. so i like to watch porn when i masturbate sometimes - FOR FREE by the way, do you really think i'm dumb enough that i can't find free porn on the internet - it just makes the job faster. nobody was "hurt", i move on with my life. if i was really hurting myself, i'd be in some sad psychological state by now. i found out i could do this when i was 12 or something. but somehow 13 years down the line i have a wife, a nice apartment, money, friends, a degree, etc.
unless i am wrong somehow. please, explain to me, how am i hurting myself. teach me.
funny thing, my girlfriend lives in pennsylvania and i live in california. i see her around once every 4-6 months. when i visit her, we have sex maybe once or twice in a week. so no, she is not there every time i have a sexual urge.
the whole thing you said with a 5 star dinner i'm totally in agreement with. sex is way better than masturbating. just switch out the use of the word "porn" in your paragraph to "masturbation" and i'm all set.
"look at it this way - sex is a fancy 5 star dinner and masturbation is like fast food. they're both good, but the 5 star meal is way better. but you really can't have the fancy meal all the time, so you settle for the fast food a lot." that's way more accurate, and it's true for me. (the other problem is that i don't eat fast food. btw this is another joke (even though it's true), please don't actually respond to this as though it were an argument).
i'm glad that you get porn for free. it's so easy to get that i'm surprised anyone pays for it. however, some people out there are paying for it, if they weren't there would hardly be a porn industry.
now, with your last sentence, some people really do get to that point with pornography. some people do get depressed and lonely and develop an addiction to it, some people's view of relationships and their overall sexuality are negatively affected by it. this probably isn't the case with you. so why is it bad for you to do it? this is covered in my previous response. i'm not saying that if you look at porn everything around you will crumble. it's not as absolute as that, none of this is written on a stone tablet somewhere. this is all just trying to find out the correct answers to questions through reason, and there are so many variables that it's complex. it's not as easy as something like "you shouldn't kill people most of the time". i still think it's important, though.
Quote
i can't help that you put words in my mouth so i had to point it out. and now you're trying to use that against me now that i've brought it up, so, don't act like i'm the only one "attacking" you.
i get the idea that you need to feel superior to others because you act like someone who does. you take almost everything seriously, have a seemingly non-existant sense of humor, and make a point to be the exact antithesis of everyone else around you for nebulous reasons.
i've presented a lot of points to you, but the only thing you continue to harp on is that porn is morally wrong and hurts the viewer and the actors based on your own set of personal beliefs. and you act all surprised when i continue to compare your argument to a theists.. really?
i don't think i put words in your mouth, i think i was trying to connect the dots of your argument. if you were not implying that pornography has some value based on how old it was, why did you mention that "it has been around since the dawn of man"? i'm just trying to make sense of your arguments here. if i'm getting something wrong, it's not because i'm trying to maliciously attack you.
maybe looks can be deceiving? i don't think that because i maybe "act like someone who needs to feel superior" means that you get to dismiss everything i say. and anyway, even if you think i have no sense of humor, even if you think i take everything too seriously, and even if you think i'm just trying to be the antithesis of other people, that doesn't all add up to the conclusion that i am someone who needs to feel superior. and even if it did, that doesn't negate anything that i'm saying. this is a form of ad hominem, trying to discredit arguments based on my perceived character traits. "he's only saying that because he think it's cool to be different".
the reason i keep "harping on" is because i feel that you're not really getting what i'm trying to say. most of your responses end up being somewhat condescending and insulting, and i think you really do have a totally different idea of what this discussion is about than i do. whereas i'm trying to learn something, you seem to be trying to protect yourself from someone you view as being judgmental. this happens a lot with discussions about morality, so i'm not really too surprised, but it is disappointing. i seriously am not having this conversation as a way to bolster my ego or make you out as some bad guy, this is just the intersection of two viewpoints and if you weren't on the defensive this conversation would a lot more beneficial to everyone.
and on a side note, please keep in mind that i
do judge my own actions. i have done things and then later realized that i think that it was an immoral thing to do. at that point i try to figure out a way to resolve the situation and prevent it from happening again. i'm not just sitting on a throne and condemning everyone and then acting as though i am perfect. i know that i am not, and i'm only 19, i have plenty to learn at this point.
so really what this boils down to is you strictly holding yourself to philosophical absolutes as a personal honor system, which you believe is fully validated simply because it is not religious. furthermore, on the subject of pornography, you view the user as dehumanizing the subject, and therefore it doesn't fit into your worldview, so you reject it and condemn those who use it.
well i'll just say this then. if i was a porn star, i would want my product to be successful. there are male and female porn stars who have become extremely successful and are proud of their work, and even branched off into other arguably more constructive careers. you may think they're being dehumanized, but i have a strong feeling they'd be offended and put off by your virtues.
Quote from: rtil on September 23, 2011 09:42 PM
so really what this boils down to is you strictly holding yourself to philosophical absolutes
no, not absolutes. i've stated many times before that these are NOT absolutes.
Quote
as a personal honor system, which you believe is fully validated simply because it is not religious.
no, it's not validated simply because it's not religious, it's validated by all of the other shit that i said.
Quote
furthermore, on the subject of pornography, you view the user as dehumanizing the subject, and therefore it doesn't fit into your worldview, so you reject it and condemn those who use it.
i've now said 3 times that i don't condemn people who use pornography. but if i did, i do not find the above statement to be incorrect. i reject pornography because it objectifies people, yes.
Quote
well i'll just say this then. if i was a porn star, i would want my product to be successful. there are male and female porn stars who have become extremely successful and are proud of their work, and even branched off into other arguably more constructive careers. you may think they're being dehumanized, but i have a strong feeling they'd be offended and put off by your virtues.
what are you defining as success? making money? becoming famous? i don't consider either of those to be signs of success.
they very well may be put off by my "virtues". that doesn't do a lot to say that what i'm saying is false, it just means people are offended by it. in the same sense that saying "god probably does not exist" is offensive to a lot of christians, that doesn't mean it isn't a statement that is more than likely true.
you have succeeded in not understanding my arguments and casting me as some sort of stuck up asshole. i'm not really sure why this is, and since i don't really know you in real life i'm not going to make any assumptions. i'm just going to say that i find it disappointing.
success is subjective, everyone has their own goals.
it doesn't just mean that people would be offended by your views. but if your moral stance is correct, then their own personal view of success and their career is nothing but a sham - they're just dehumanized objects who cause their viewers to do morally wrong things - according to you. i don't think you realize the larger consequences of what you believe, and how condescending it is to people who are just living their lives. it's not quite the same as your comparison to telling christians god doesn't exist, because that's a completely faith-based belief.
i completely understand your arguments. but what you don't understand is that my view of your arguments differ from yours. i see this subject in an entirely different light, and when i say what i say, i am fully aware that i am interpreting your arguments differently than you would. you must also accept that your position on this subject is near contradictory with most atheist and humanist worldviews, and more in line with a theistic or religious worldview.
Quote
success is subjective, everyone has their own goals.
i can accept this.
Quote
it doesn't just mean that people would be offended by your views. but if your moral stance is correct, then their own personal view of success and their career is nothing but a sham - they're just dehumanized objects who cause their viewers to do morally wrong things - according to you. i don't think you realize the larger consequences of what you believe, and how condescending it is to people who are just living their lives. it's not quite the same as your comparison to telling christians god doesn't exist, because that's a completely faith-based belief.
i don't quote see the distinction. if you tell christians that god probably isn't real, they get offended because that's the basis of their entire worldview. it could be interpreted as insulting, saying that they've spent their whole lives believing a lie, so they must be stupid, and you must think that you're some superior person with a hgher intellect. this actually happens to a lot of atheists. bill o' reilly has said this to many an atheist guest on his terrible show.
you don't think you're smarter than someone purely because of their religious beliefs, right? i don't. i don't think you do. same for me, i don't think i'm smarter, better, or more moral because of my moral reasoning. i don't think this is a hard concept to grasp. there are a lot of reasons people might be religious, and there are a lot of reasons while people might be attracted to certain moral views. that doesn't mean that all religions are correct or that are moral ideas are equal, but it does mean that you don't have to be a bigot about anything.
Quote
i completely understand your arguments. but what you don't understand is that my view of your arguments differ from yours. i see this subject in an entirely different light, and when i say what i say, i am fully aware that i am interpreting your arguments differently than you would. you must also accept that your position on this subject is near contradictory with most atheist and humanist worldviews, and more in line with a theistic or religious worldview.
i do understand that your views are different than mine, that is the point of this discussion.
i don't think you truly understand what i'm saying, to be honest. i think you are connecting dots that are not there because i'm saying things that other people have said before that you a priori have disagreements with. this is ok, i've done it before. i've hard arguments with people who, based on how they phrased their arguments, came across as saying something they were not saying. i can admit that i might be coming across this way, but please try to get past that because it is not really relevant to the actual content.
and yeah, i will submit that my particular ideas are different than a lot of atheist's. that's ok by me, there is no single doctrine of atheism that anyone must subscribe to.
a huge difference between me and a lot of atheists is that i actually believe morality exists. that is to say i believe in objective morality. i don't believe in moral absolutes (ok, maybe one or two. rape and child molestation seem like they could be good candidates), but i don't think that value judgments are totally based on opinion. i will concede that all morality is relative to conscious creatures, mainly humans in particular. i don't think that this weakens the case for objective morality, though.
for more info on this particular subject, i urge you to read "the moral landscape" by sam harris. harris is referred to as one of the "four horsemen of atheism", alongside dawkins, hitchens and dennett, and while i don't 100% agree with his book, it is at least one other atheist who believe in objective morality. he also depicts many all-too-familiar encounters with atheists who defend the absence of morality like a deeply held religious belief.
if you are at all interested in sam harris you could start out by watching this video:
The Moral Landscape (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sfGw98pVCA#ws)
honestly, sam harris is a much smarter person than i am and he's much more articulate. you should really watch his video
so what does your objective morality have to do with any of this? my point was that your moral stance on this issue requires that you see those people in a lesser light. if you disagree, it is irrelevant, because that is how it works.
societies mandate morality, and exists in that sense. but you've clearly come to your own "objective" morality based on personal circumstances and beliefs. but since you've come to that place, it's fruitless for me to attempt to change your mind, so i'm not going to bother anymore.
you can watch porn and not objectify and dehumanize people. this is unassailable. i'm done.
Quote
so what does your objective morality have to do with any of this?
not much, it was just a side note to emphasize that i don't have that much in common with a lot atheists, especially the ones that are philosophically illiterate.
Quote
societies mandate morality, and exists in that sense. but you've clearly come to your own "objective" morality based on personal circumstances and beliefs. but since you've come to that place, it's fruitless for me to attempt to change your mind, so i'm not going to bother anymore.
this is a clear example that you don't know what i am talking about. i am not calling my own beliefs objectively true. you don't seem to understand most of what i say, and i wonder if it's because i'm not good at explaining it or if it's because you're just not reading well into what i'm saying. alas
Quote
you can watch porn and not objectify and dehumanize people. this is unassailable. i'm done.
i can tell that this is a deeply held belief for you, so i'm going to do what i do with creationists that claim that evolution is a "sham" and leave it alone.
tl;dr version ?
Quote from: trent bortknob on September 23, 2011 11:36 PM
Quote
you can watch porn and not objectify and dehumanize people. this is unassailable. i'm done.
i can tell that this is a deeply held belief for you, so i'm going to do what i do with creationists that claim that evolution is a "sham" and leave it alone.
a+
Quote from: nonzop on September 24, 2011 12:07 AM
Quote from: trent bortknob on September 23, 2011 11:36 PM
Quote
you can watch porn and not objectify and dehumanize people. this is unassailable. i'm done.
i can tell that this is a deeply held belief for you, so i'm going to do what i do with creationists that claim that evolution is a "sham" and leave it alone.
a+
(https://thebackalleys.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FjYPNx.gif&hash=c290371a71c7c64bb7b6e73a5140eb503866de89)
how can anyone resist responding to that shit
I've reported both of your inane posts to the local moderator. Enjoy your bans
this just happenned:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Cinco-Bro-Oche/137598992954062 (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Cinco-Bro-Oche/137598992954062)
F8 Keynote Introduction (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_vz6Me_TIY#ws)
I hate it when people act like porn is some horrible thing to society. I think it has benefited people in a lot of ways.
-Helps people learn how to fuck better. One of my friend's previous girlfriends mostly got off to stuff like written erotica and didn't know how to stroke a goddamn dick to save her life. A lot of people learn how to be better fuckers thanks to porn. Not to mention porn helps give people more ideas on how to improve their sex life whether it be different positions or kinkier, more wild stuff.
-Porn is great for learning about human autonomy and gave me a far more realistic perspective of the human body than how fucking photoshopped magazine covers influenced teenage girls. Even though I'm a thin guy, I used to have really screwed up views of human autonomy and used to hold in my stomach all the time in public places. Porn helped make realize that's fucking dumb.
-Great for the economy. Even during the recession, the pron industry is doing rather well compared to a lot of other industries. If porn simply wasn't profitable, we would have a lot of more people out of work.
-Less incentive to be a creepy pervert or rape someone. If people could not view pornography at all in their entire lives, some of the people who suck with women could resort to some horrible things. >_>
-It's fun!
For five other wonderful examples, check out this fantastic article (http://www.cracked.com/article_18888_5-ways-porn-created-modern-world.html) by Cracked.com. I'd also defend the internet, but I have fucking homework and reading through this thread took me over an entire album in length to read.
wac you just ordered a philosophical regurgitation from the bortner himself
wow zuckerburg is more of a douche than i am. what the fuck
1:30: Wow... What the fuck?
4:50: Oh...
4:50
2 of those things!?
Quote from: W.A.C. on September 24, 2011 09:37 AM
A lot of people learn how to be better fuckers thanks to porn.
you're a fucker GOD DAMN PWND
Quote from: trent bortknob on September 24, 2011 06:26 PMyou're a fucker GOD DAMN PWND
No, I'm a virgin...unfortunately. >_>
hate to go back to this but i think this argument is pretty interesting!
i am personally not really all that turned on by porn, but that the claim that it completely dehumanizes people (by people i mean
ONLY women
IF YOU DIDNT HAPPEN TO KNOW) is a little radical. i think that it is sometimes depressing and a watching pornstar lacks the emotionally satisfying "realness" of genuine sex (also you know the part where you are having the sex), but pornstars, unlike prostitutes (for the most part idk maybe some girl loves being a prostitute more than anything and has always wanted to be one), consciously make the decision to do what they do. it is not often just something that they just resorted to because theyre broke and thats all they CAN do. their profession is almost always something that theyve chosen to make a career out of, and if they enjoy their job and make a living off of it then thats good for them really!
or you know you could just say "fuck that" entirely and just watch amateur pornography or whatever and watch 2 people who are actually emotionally invested in each other genuinely enjoying doing something kind of wonderful on camera and jerk off to that (<--- the best decision/ makes everyone involved happy/ no need to discuss any further/
i win this internet debate) (but then again watching 2 people have real passionate loving sex kind of emphasizes how you currently are not having real passionate sex but that is SOMETHING ELSE ENTIRELY ok)
i think your problem with porn taylor isnt really porn, but with generally how women are often exploited for sexual appeal in the media, and while that is something that i am not exactly an advocate of, its not something that i actively condemn other people for taking part in or appreciating either, as it really is an incredibly natural thing to happen. men have always been more interested in sex than women, and while you could argue that being primarily interested in their bodies objectifies a person, it is a more human mindset than anything else. it is a bare-bones basic function in people that, while certainly more evident in men, is built into all of us and declaring it as something that shouldnt be done or immoral just doesnt really work no matter what argument you can come up with. it always has and always will happen, and that is really just human nature, no matter how superficial and pathetic you interpret it as being.
TL;DR: i think that you can watch porn without personally objectifying people as that is something that is largely determined by the viewer (and the kind of porn really as just watching a couple have sex doesnt usually materialize anyone in the slightest) / there is no question that the porn industry exploits peoples view of women in that light but that isnt really something that is worth fighting against as, while its sometimes sad, thats just kind of how people are
STL;DR: imo youre both kinda right
ps. i think/ thought that you guys are/ were debating/ debated really well!! you both made articulate well-thought out posts without resorting to petty insults and shit! :--) (except for the part where you brought religion into this come on guys you know challenging anyone heres athiest-ness is a bad idea (or a good idea depending on the intended effect))
meanwhileQuote from: W.A.C. on September 24, 2011 09:37 AM
I hate it when people act like porn is some horrible thing to society. I think it has benefited people in a lot of ways.
-Helps people learn how to fuck better.
(https://thebackalleys.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcoolsciencelab.com%2Fanimated-laughing.gif&hash=12cb15cec53e8b670b9af74ce9d2da5bb6bb2944)
Quote from: W.A.C. on September 24, 2011 09:37 AM
-Porn is great for learning about human autonomy.
this is seriously the craziest point ive ever heard used in any argument ever
its not even the fact that its bad, its like off the scale that determines the quality of a point
i mean usually people can tell that most girls arent actually the way they look on magazine covers and reality television when they do something like
go outside. unless theyve never left their underground concrete bunker hidden underneath a small patch of farmland in north dakota, most people can clearly fucking see that not all women have huge breasts/ model new clothing brands/ are under 30.
on top of that, the majority of the porn industry looks for skinny good looking girls, so if it says anything at all to self-conscious teenage girls, the only thing it says is "this is how it is popular to look and this is what guys like. look at all these views! if i want to get fucked by big ricky and have millions of dudes finger their butthole while watching me get a fist plunged so deep in my vagina that it is visible under my skin, i will have to look like this girl!"
the only way i can think that this point might actually be even remotely coherent is if youre like talking about some irl guro-type shit where you get to see the placement of someones organs as they are cut open and stomach fucked or something idk
you are a mystery wac
uh anyway yeah new facebook kind of sucks who can believe that facebook would add shit no one wanted and break the shit they had that was useful?? nutty shit y0
porn is like having sex without all that sex or fulfillment!
zop I wish I could give you more than one pizza point for that post
i mean you can give me one a day you know if you really want to
If I remember to, I'll try :X
i actually do agree that porn is dehumanizing in a way
i mean, if you think about it, you have to be a pretty hollow fucking shell of a person to be able to take 3 dicks in your ass at the same time while 20 dudes jizz on your face everyday. I think a lot of porn stars feel that they are dehumanized. and porn stars probably get treated like a piece of meat by everyone else in their industry
i think a lot of people who choose to do porn, do so because they come from broken families and shitty pasts, and they probably dont have the higher education to be able to get a decent job. i think a lot of women do porn because they have to pay off debts and really have no other options for money other than stripping or prostitution. sure a lot of pornstars can make a good living from the industry, but after being used as a human cum receptacle every day, i think anyone would feel like they arent human anymore.
it doesnt mean you're a bad person for watching porn. i dont think a lot of people realize that pornstars are actually miserable and sad people doing a job they probably hate themselves for
btw im not just referring to women, im sure men feel dehumanized too when they have to fuck a million disgusting whores
i dont think these people enjoy their job honestly
Quote from: shura on September 24, 2011 10:23 PM
i actually do agree that porn is dehumanizing in a way
i mean, if you think about it, you have to be a pretty hollow fucking shell of a person to be able to take 3 dicks in your ass at the same time while 20 dudes jizz on your face everyday. I think a lot of porn stars feel that they are dehumanized.
from what i understand, many dont. i am honestly not exactly very well informed on the luxurious life of the average pornstars and i imagine some do feel kind of shitty, but the few pornstars i have heard about/ read interviews with/ whatever i did to be informed about this shit idk dont really say they FEEL objectified. i might be wrong but idk. i think its more the audiences perception of them which objectifies them, while while i have heard that they personally feel empowered and confident to be able to have that kind of effect on people. i honestly have no clue though, but i think the objectifying of women is more an issue with the audience for their work than an internal issue for the pornstar herself.
Quote from: shura on September 24, 2011 10:23 PM
i think a lot of people who choose to do porn, do so because they come from broken families and shitty pasts, and they probably dont have the higher education to be able to get a decent job. i think a lot of women do porn because they have to pay off debts and really have no other options for money other than stripping or prostitution.
sure a lot of pornstars can make a good living from the industry, but after being used as a human cum receptacle every day, i think anyone would feel like they arent human anymore.
i dont know. i imagine it isnt daily or anything like that. working as a pornstar seems like being any other actor in an industry, you have work on arranging deals and deciding which jobs to take and who to work with and all, and doing that has to require some sort of self-determination and passion for their line of work. not saying like that all pornstars are well educated and love their job, but i imagine being a pornstar is a lot of work, as you have to constantly work to keep your image and do a lot of self promotion to make a living.
Quote from: shura on September 24, 2011 10:23 PM
it doesnt mean you're a bad person for watching porn. i dont think a lot of people realize that pornstars are actually miserable and sad people doing a job they probably hate themselves for
i do not doubt that some are, but making an absolute statement on the average pornstars opinion of their work is something you (i think idk maybe you know about this kind of stuff (i cant find a way to word this without seeming like im taking a shitty potshot at you or something i just genuinely dont know maybe youve done your research on this because i really havent)) and i cant really do. i know a few people like sasha grey love their job as a pornstar, and many like paris hilton use it as a gateway into entering in other fields of work like modeling and acting.
but i mean i think like taylor, youre gripe isnt really with porn. women are used for their beauty just about everywhere. its more a problem with the public than anything, many women relish in their fame through modeling and shit as it makes them feel confident, and it seems like that kind of mindset might also apply to pornstars.
Quote from: W.A.S.I.M. on September 24, 2011 10:33 PM
^true that
92% of women who enter the porn industry were at least sexually abused as children
also for every actress that get a hollywood lead role, at least 1200 other actresses are forced into the porn business
ah
well those are some pretty sad statistics. i guess i was just wrongly basing my knowledge of a pornstars life off of the ones that have gotten famous and making assumptions, sorry. do you know what source collected that data tho? not like trying to challenge you or some shit i just kind of would like to know more
also what do you mean when you say "at least sexually abused as children"? at least kind of implies that a larger percent have had worse shit happen
at least there is hentaikawaiidoujin.com
wait wasnt this thread about facebook
is it sort of sad that i actually tried going to hentaikawaiidoujin.com
it had a funny name alright i just wanted to see if it was an actual website ok im serious !!!!
Quote from: nonzop on September 24, 2011 11:12 PM
Quote from: W.A.S.I.M. on September 24, 2011 10:33 PM
^true that
92% of women who enter the porn industry were at least sexually abused as children
also for every actress that get a hollywood lead role, at least 1200 other actresses are forced into the porn business
ah
well those are some pretty sad statistics. i guess i was just wrongly basing my knowledge of a pornstars life off of the ones that have gotten famous and making assumptions, sorry. do you know what source collected that data tho? not like trying to challenge you or some shit i just kind of would like to know more
also what do you mean when you say "at least sexually abused as children"? at least kind of implies that a larger percent have had worse shit happen
as far as i can tell, he got those facts from a twitter account called injustice facts, which constantly mentions ridiculous facts and never mentions the source data
also, from what i gather, becoming a pornstar is very difficult (even for a woman) so 'being forced to become a pornstar' sounds ridiculous to me.
a thread about facebook being troublesome just became a moral philosophy of porn.
because of that i'm giving everyone free pizza pointes today. pat your backs
threads derail all the time, this one has been about porn for the past 3 pages. get over it
this jarring derailing is pretty commendable
oh shit this is the back allas nvm oops
Quote from: nonzop on September 25, 2011 12:11 AM
is it sort of sad that i actually tried going to hentaikawaiidoujin.com
it had a funny name alright i just wanted to see if it was an actual website ok im serious !!!!
Quote from: nonzop on September 24, 2011 09:51 PM(https://thebackalleys.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcoolsciencelab.com%2Fanimated-laughing.gif&hash=12cb15cec53e8b670b9af74ce9d2da5bb6bb2944)
Yeah, because no way in hell is visual learning ever helpful to sex. :| A lot of great, fun ideas can be found in porn.
Quote from: nonzop on September 24, 2011 09:51 PMthis is seriously the craziest point ive ever heard used in any argument ever
its not even the fact that its bad, its like off the scale that determines the quality of a point
i mean usually people can tell that most girls arent actually the way they look on magazine covers and reality television when they do something like go outside. unless theyve never left their underground concrete bunker hidden underneath a small patch of farmland in north dakota, most people can clearly fucking see that not all women have huge breasts/ model new clothing brands/ are under 30.
I brought up magazines covers because some people were complaining that porn negatively affects women when it comes to their view of their appearance and I felt like mentioning one medium that does actually affect those views far worse than porn does in most cases. That, and my point brought up that porn actually improved my perception of human autonomy in general.
Quote from: nonzop on September 24, 2011 09:51 PMon top of that, the majority of the porn industry looks for skinny good looking girls, so if it says anything at all to self-conscious teenage girls, the only thing it says is "this is how it is popular to look and this is what guys like. look at all these views! if i want to get fucked by big ricky and have millions of dudes finger their butthole while watching me get a fist plunged so deep in my vagina that it is visible under my skin, i will have to look like this girl!"
Not like all the thin girls in porn are one exact size and a lot of people have different preferences. The porn industry tries to cater to a lot of different tastes so they have a much greater variety in body types than you probably realize.
Quote from: nonzop on September 24, 2011 09:51 PMthe only way i can think that this point might actually be even remotely coherent is if youre like talking about some irl guro-type shit where you get to see the placement of someones organs as they are cut open and stomach fucked or something idk
you are a mystery wac
o_O
Quote from: shura on September 24, 2011 10:23 PMi actually do agree that porn is dehumanizing in a way
i mean, if you think about it, you have to be a pretty hollow fucking shell of a person to be able to take 3 dicks in your ass at the same time while 20 dudes jizz on your face everyday. I think a lot of porn stars feel that they are dehumanized. and porn stars probably get treated like a piece of meat by everyone else in their industry
i think a lot of people who choose to do porn, do so because they come from broken families and shitty pasts, and they probably dont have the higher education to be able to get a decent job. i think a lot of women do porn because they have to pay off debts and really have no other options for money other than stripping or prostitution. sure a lot of pornstars can make a good living from the industry, but after being used as a human cum receptacle every day, i think anyone would feel like they arent human anymore.
it doesnt mean you're a bad person for watching porn. i dont think a lot of people realize that pornstars are actually miserable and sad people doing a job they probably hate themselves for
While there are people in the industry who either hate their job or grow to hate it overtime, lots of porn actors really enjoy their job and are glad to be in the industry. To act like nearly all of them are miserable people who feel non-human is just stereotyping.
Quote from: W.A.S.I.M. on September 24, 2011 10:33 PM92% of women who enter the porn industry were at least sexually abused as children
also for every actress that get a hollywood lead role, at least 1200 other actresses are forced into the porn business
Proof please.
Quote from: creamcorn on September 25, 2011 12:56 AM
Quote from: nonzop on September 24, 2011 11:12 PM
Quote from: W.A.S.I.M. on September 24, 2011 10:33 PM
^true that
92% of women who enter the porn industry were at least sexually abused as children
also for every actress that get a hollywood lead role, at least 1200 other actresses are forced into the porn business
ah
well those are some pretty sad statistics. i guess i was just wrongly basing my knowledge of a pornstars life off of the ones that have gotten famous and making assumptions, sorry. do you know what source collected that data tho? not like trying to challenge you or some shit i just kind of would like to know more
also what do you mean when you say "at least sexually abused as children"? at least kind of implies that a larger percent have had worse shit happen
as far as i can tell, he got those facts from a twitter account called injustice facts, which constantly mentions ridiculous facts and never mentions the source data
yeah i was gonna say, this reminds me of the shit people mindlessly copypaste on their facebook statuses without any reference material, like "98% OF TEENS DO DRUGZ POST THIS ON UR WALL IF U DONT", etc.
don't go throwing around numbers if you don't have a source to cite (and i mean a real source not the place you pasted it from). just because you read it on the internet doesn't make it true.
anyway, while i'm sure there are plenty of people in the porn industry who are hollow shells of their formal selves, the same could be said of most mind-numbing desk jobs that suck the life out of people. it's just a different form of it.
however, there are lots of porn stars who genuinely enjoy what they do and made a larger career from their former success. the best example i can think of is sasha grey.
certainly it does seem a bit of an extreme thing to say "watching porn dehumanizes people". the point i'm making is supposed to come across as less extreme but i'm not good at articulating it.
when you watch porn, you're watching it to get off to it. no objection here, right? is it correct to assert that no one watches pornography for the stellar plot lines and entertainment value? (actually, some of you probably watch hentai for this reason, but i digress).
my stance is that, since watching pornography is soley for the purpose of getting sexual satisfaction, the people in porn (these are human beings like you and i) are just tools you use to get that pleasure. this is dehumanizing solely because you are not treating the people in porn like humans. this is why i'm wary of casual sex, because it seems like it's usually using someone for sexual satisfaction, not treating them with respect, like they have value.
however, you guys bring an additional component to the discussion. if it can be established that the porn industry is generally dangerous or bad in some way, then supporting it by watching porn would be considered bad too. i didn't make this claim because i don't know enough about the porn industry to substantiate a claim like that. but if someone here think it might be true then it would be a good addition. if you do make claims about anything like that please cite some sources so that i know that they're accurate.
Quote from: W.A.C. on September 24, 2011 07:56 PM
Quote from: trent bortknob on September 24, 2011 06:26 PMyou're a fucker GOD DAMN PWND
No, I'm a virgin...unfortunately. >_>
that's not what i meant by fucker you asshole. shut the fuck up.
seriously, you are the only person i've ever met who uses the word "fucker" to describe "a person who fucks".
i also just realized that if my theory is correct, you can watch hentai because it does not consist of actual human beings.
but then you have to ask yourself, do you really want to watch hentai?
Quote from: trent bortknob on September 25, 2011 06:27 AM
if it can be established that the porn industry is generally dangerous or bad in some way, then supporting it by watching porn would be considered bad too. i didn't make this claim because i don't know enough about the porn industry to substantiate a claim like that. but if someone here think it might be true then it would be a good addition. if you do make claims about anything like that please cite some sources so that i know that they're accurate.
you're really hard pressed to make a case about this aren't you
well, for starters there is wasim's post, which is certainly facebook-status-update worthy. i'm sure any decent republican congressmen would put an unsourced statistic like that in a bill, so you might as well use it.
i'm not concerned with trying to prove my point, im concerned with beliefs being true. i have a suspicion that the porn industry is probably not very healthy, but i don't have any proof or evidence of this, so i never used it as an argument. some other people were making claims, so i challenged them to organize it. i might do research sometime, but i'm not going to pull a statistic out of thin air and act like it's proof. if you really think i would do that (and i suspect you do), i have to ask why you have such a negative view of my integrity.
i just typed up a long rebuttal to w.a.c.'s whole argument but it was lost when the page wouldn't load due to my shitty internet. i might retype it later, but i mean honestly nonzop covered it pretty well anyway. plus, w.a.c's arguments are ridiculous i doubt anyone but w.a.c himself thinks that they're worth anything.
i found an article with a woman who interviewed a bunch of porn stars http://trueslant.com/susannahbreslin/2010/05/04/where-porn-stars-come-from/ (http://trueslant.com/susannahbreslin/2010/05/04/where-porn-stars-come-from/)
but still, i dont think it's dehumanizing to watch porn, unless you're a young kid and still impressionable. i doubt anyone rtil's age would form a different opinion on women just by watching a porno honestly. i guess that's why porn is (supposed to be) restricted to minors
oh yeah real quick, cuz i'm gonna wake up early tomorrow and probably won't be back to check this thread til like mid day, i'll add this.
i think the argument that we have natural tendency to objectify women and/or obsess over sex was used here, so let me refute that.
there are many things that we have natural tendencies, not the least of them being violence, racism, and mysticism. these are all traits that have developed through evolution, as they were useful at some point in our ancestry. now, however, reason is developing and is taking over. we no longer think it is moral to discriminate based on the color of one's skin or their gender. most of us do not think it's ok to act violently. a lot of us still succumb to faith as some sort of virtue, a lot of us accept ideas that have no evidence for them (read most blogs for my source supporting that claim).
we're learning that it is not good to objectify women. we can use reason to identify what is moral, and most of us, upon reflection, can probably understand why it doesn't make any sense to discriminate against someone of a different skin color. we can do this with the objectification of women, violence, etc etc etc. all of these things are natural to humans.
for more info on this subject, check out the book "godless" by dan barker, particularly pages 352-353.
i am incapable of learning it is not good to objectify women because i watch porn though
Quote from: trent bortknob on September 25, 2011 07:45 AMi'm not concerned with trying to prove my point, im concerned with beliefs being true. i have a suspicion that the porn industry is probably not very healthy, but i don't have any proof or evidence of this, so i never used it as an argument. some other people were making claims, so i challenged them to organize it. i might do research sometime, but i'm not going to pull a statistic out of thin air and act like it's proof. if you really think i would do that (and i suspect you do), i have to ask why you have such a negative view of my integrity.
Worst aspect of legal pornography is the spread of sexual diseases. It's a major damn problem. Some California lawmakers were thinking about mandating condom use in porn but that would have been disastrous. [LINK] (http://www.kval.com/news/entertainment/123402828.html) [LINK] (http://webmarhaen.blogspot.com/2011/09/bintang-porno-di-as-tak-wajib-pakai.html) Fortunately, they are tested every month but they should probably be tested every week. >_>
Quote from: W.A.C. on September 25, 2011 11:42 AM
Quote from: trent bortknob on September 25, 2011 07:45 AMi'm not concerned with trying to prove my point, im concerned with beliefs being true. i have a suspicion that the porn industry is probably not very healthy, but i don't have any proof or evidence of this, so i never used it as an argument. some other people were making claims, so i challenged them to organize it. i might do research sometime, but i'm not going to pull a statistic out of thin air and act like it's proof. if you really think i would do that (and i suspect you do), i have to ask why you have such a negative view of my integrity.
Worst aspect of legal pornography is the spread of sexual diseases. It's a major damn problem. Some California lawmakers were thinking about mandating condom use in porn but that would have been disastrous. [LINK] (http://www.kval.com/news/entertainment/123402828.html) [LINK] (http://webmarhaen.blogspot.com/2011/09/bintang-porno-di-as-tak-wajib-pakai.html) Fortunately, they are tested every month but they should probably be tested every week. >_>
actually, in recent times, pornographic actors are actually less likely to get std's than sexually active people in the general population because of strict testing and safer standards. that's why when you hear about an std in the porn industry it's a big deal - because it doesn't happen very often.
porn kills your babies and will melt your eyes and it will cause your hand to grrow a bunch of hair and god wwill kill you and send you to hell for watching porn!
(https://thebackalleys.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F_rkJCSGaEfU4%2FS_SKS9d5y3I%2FAAAAAAAAAx8%2FWXfLH4TVyJs%2Fs1600%2F2lna4g8.jpg&hash=7dcabe0d552f4eed5e3783591d76d446075f04f9)
PS: then, if women watch porn, does that objectify women or men?
Quote from: W.A.C. on September 25, 2011 11:42 AM
Quote from: trent bortknob on September 25, 2011 07:45 AMi'm not concerned with trying to prove my point, im concerned with beliefs being true. i have a suspicion that the porn industry is probably not very healthy, but i don't have any proof or evidence of this, so i never used it as an argument. some other people were making claims, so i challenged them to organize it. i might do research sometime, but i'm not going to pull a statistic out of thin air and act like it's proof. if you really think i would do that (and i suspect you do), i have to ask why you have such a negative view of my integrity.
Worst aspect of legal pornography is the spread of sexual diseases. It's a major damn problem. Some California lawmakers were thinking about mandating condom use in porn but that would have been disastrous. [LINK] (http://www.kval.com/news/entertainment/123402828.html) [LINK] (http://webmarhaen.blogspot.com/2011/09/bintang-porno-di-as-tak-wajib-pakai.html) Fortunately, they are tested every month but they should probably be tested every week. >_>
w.a.c why can't you make any coherent arguments?
spreading an s.t.d. is not inherently immoral. the only time it could be is if you did it on purpose to harm someone (people actually do this) or lie about having one just so that your partner will fuck you in ignorance. if both people know about its existence and consent, then there is nothing immoral about it. and if neither person knows of its existence, it's not immoral, it's just an accident. it just is what it is.
s.t.d's only become capable of being deemed immoral if they are linked to immoral activities. otherwise, they're just something that happens.
thanks for clearing that up teach
i'm just saying, his argument is not valid and doesn't add anything to a case against the porn industry.
he's not arguing anything he was just making a false statement
well then i guess i have my bases covered
i like how we can never stay on topic in a thread
well i mean was this thread going to have anything else happen to it this was probably the most interesting thing that couldve ever happened
This is terrible
(https://thebackalleys.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1179.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fx393%2Fdante224%2Fbirdporn-2.gif&hash=602093f42d72a7967973e0270eaf6f4c52d885fd)(https://thebackalleys.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1179.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fx393%2Fdante224%2Fbirdporn-2.gif&hash=602093f42d72a7967973e0270eaf6f4c52d885fd)(https://thebackalleys.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1179.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fx393%2Fdante224%2Fbirdporn-2.gif&hash=602093f42d72a7967973e0270eaf6f4c52d885fd)
this is the best thread we've had in ages
possibly even better than the atheism debate from last year
I never viewed STDs as immoral, just an unfortunate consequence form the risky industry. I remember watching some video in the past and thought the person said "24 thousand", not "24 hundred" for some statistic so I thought the stats were worse. After doing more research, yeah, it's nowhere near the problem I thought it was.
Edit-
It really makes me wonder how effective "safe sex" really is compared to condomless sex.
Quote from: W.A.C. on September 27, 2011 02:57 AM
It really makes me wonder how effective "safe sex" really is compared to condomless sex.
well, pulling out is not really fun or easy for me so condoms are necessary
pulling out isn't necessary when you're getting fucked in the ass by a big gay nigger owned nerd
i didn't read this thread btw it is WAY too homoerotic for my tastes thank you very much
fuck WAC more like WACK off ya faggit ..|.,
i just DESTROYED all of page 7 with my superior intellect and charisma
real men don't need sunglasses to look COOL
DO YOU HEAR THE VOICES TOO??
wow guys it looks like its getting kinda CRAZY OVER HERE!!
(https://thebackalleys.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F24.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_lqzkv4OCGp1qhqdeso1_500.gif&hash=359e5b53fcd409dcb3c8aa8fb840e6e894b42208)haha WOAH DUDE haha so weird and crazy(https://thebackalleys.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F24.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_lqzkv4OCGp1qhqdeso1_500.gif&hash=359e5b53fcd409dcb3c8aa8fb840e6e894b42208)
fuck u idiot
im 50 years old have at me
back in vietnam
(https://thebackalleys.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cornel1801.com%2Fvideo%2FMH64VB72%2Fmo04_1.jpg&hash=e623e1cd361659a5cbee6df80b0860f02ad83561)
whats GOOD homies?
wolf: "Nice hat i want 1."
guy: "im sticking my hand in my ass"
whats the point of spamming when there arent any ranks anymore?!?!?!?!?!?!
uh who in the fuck would be gay enough to spam for ranks
i'm just fixing the thread
oh ok, please continue
HEY EVERYBODY, I'M WATCHING GAY PORNO
thread of the year all years :cool:
i saw you, i saw you touch that 4-year old, sick asshole
Quote from: trent bortknob on September 27, 2011 03:24 AMwell, pulling out is not really fun or easy for me so condoms are necessary
Well, I plan to get a vasectomy someday. If condoms aren't very effective in protecting against sexual diseases, not a lot of purpose for me to use them when I have a vasectomy in the future.
Quote from: W.A.C. on September 29, 2011 05:22 AM
Quote from: trent bortknob on September 27, 2011 03:24 AMwell, pulling out is not really fun or easy for me so condoms are necessary
Well, I plan to get a vasectomy someday. If condoms aren't very effective in protecting against sexual diseases, not a lot of purpose for me to use them when I have a vasectomy in the future.
Not a lot of purpose if youre not having sex either
Just W.A.C.in off all day
Quote from: W.A.C. on September 29, 2011 05:22 AM
Quote from: trent bortknob on September 27, 2011 03:24 AMwell, pulling out is not really fun or easy for me so condoms are necessary
Well, I plan to get a vasectomy someday. If condoms aren't very effective in protecting against sexual diseases, not a lot of purpose for me to use them when I have a vasectomy in the future.
most people use condoms so that they don't get someone pregnant. if you're using them to protect yourself against std's, you're both stupid and probably banging a slut
Quote from: CoolDrMoney on September 29, 2011 05:32 AMNot a lot of purpose if youre not having sex either
True...
Quote from: CoolDrMoney on September 29, 2011 05:33 AMJust W.A.C.in off all day
I actually don't masturbate very often.
Quote from: rtil on September 29, 2011 06:35 AMmost people use condoms so that they don't get someone pregnant. if you're using them to protect yourself against std's, you're both stupid and probably banging a slut
Oh. I thought their main purpose was to protect against sexual diseases. o_O
lol W.a.c
oh god lmao
Quote from: rtil on September 29, 2011 06:35 AM
most people use condoms so that they don't get someone pregnant. if you're using them to protect yourself against std's, you're both stupid and probably banging a slut
Just because people mostly think about preventing pregnancy regarding condoms doesn't mean that using a condom to protect against STDs is invalid. The point of condoms is to reduce the rate of catching STDs and pregnancy. By protect, it means to reduce the probability of catching STDs from infected partners. Nothing is perfect but its actually a rather effective method of preventing STDs, and certainly better than wearing nothing at all - even with other contraceptive techniques being used.
Source(s): http://www.cdc.gov/condomeffectiveness/brief.html (http://www.cdc.gov/condomeffectiveness/brief.html), http://www.patient.co.uk/health/Condom-%28Sheath%29.htm (http://www.patient.co.uk/health/Condom-%28Sheath%29.htm), my GP
i didn't say it was invalid, i said that's what most people use 'em for. you can still get some std's with a condom
Quote from: Shida on September 29, 2011 03:27 PM
Quote from: rtil on September 29, 2011 06:35 AM
most people use condoms so that they don't get someone pregnant. if you're using them to protect yourself against std's, you're both stupid and probably banging a slut
Just because people mostly think about preventing pregnancy regarding condoms doesn't mean that using a condom to protect against STDs is invalid. The point of condoms is to reduce the rate of catching STDs and pregnancy. By protect, it means to reduce the probability of catching STDs from infected partners. Nothing is perfect but its actually a rather effective method of preventing STDs, and certainly better than wearing nothing at all - even with other contraceptive techniques being used.
Source(s): http://www.cdc.gov/condomeffectiveness/brief.html (http://www.cdc.gov/condomeffectiveness/brief.html), http://www.patient.co.uk/health/Condom-%28Sheath%29.htm (http://www.patient.co.uk/health/Condom-%28Sheath%29.htm), my GP
mm I love it when u talk that way....
fuh
facebook of SEX (picture of butt)
faceFUCK Ha Ha lolz
Quote from: Sinitron on September 29, 2011 10:55 PMfacebook of SEX
There's an actual dating site called that.
that's what he was referring to...
If it isn't too late to post in this thread, I'd like to ask what is it to be human and what is it to be humane to you Bortner
What makes a porn actor more inherently dehumanized than some office drone or a minimum wage janitor or any other menial and humiliating job?
How about any entretainer ever, you take pleasure and self satisfaction from their work, you might not care about them just the entretainment they provide, are they dehumanized too?
but by what you said the dehumanization/objectification takes place inside the brain of the viewer, then what does it matter, if all the material you need to jerk-off is inside your brain aren't you objectifying the idea of sex, after all that material probably originated from your memories so you'll always end dehumanizing the target of your pleasure, even if the target has no way of knowing that, then what does it matter
Is your concern with this dehumanization purely sexual? Wouldn't you think that obsession with sex and the negative implications of it are caused by the antecedents of the society we live in. Didn't you say we should abandon old traditions and cetain aspects of human nature. You should work on your consistency bro.
tl;dr does this shit matter anyway
Quote from: put on September 30, 2011 05:36 AM
If it isn't too late to post in this thread, I'd like to ask what is it to be human and what is it to be humane to you Bortner
What makes a porn actor more inherently dehumanized than some office drone or a minimum wage janitor or any other menial and humiliating job?
How about any entretainer ever, you take pleasure and self satisfaction from their work, you might not care about them just the entretainment they provide, are they dehumanized too?
but by what you said the dehumanization/objectification takes place inside the brain of the viewer, then what does it matter, if all the material you need to jerk-off is inside your brain aren't you objectifying the idea of sex, after all that material probably originated from your memories so you'll always end dehumanizing the target of your pleasure, even if the target has no way of knowing that, then what does it matter
Is your concern with this dehumanization purely sexual? Wouldn't you think that obsession with sex and the negative implications of it are caused by the antecedents of the society we live in. Didn't you say we should abandon old traditions and cetain aspects of human nature. You should work on your consistency bro.
tl;dr does this shit matter anyway
1. tough question
2. well, this is like comparing apples and oranges, but i'm not necessarily saying that office workers aren't being dehumanized. it's pretty clear that, for a lot of positions, the higher ups look down on the average workers as replaceable and kind of ant-like. this is also bad in my opinion, and some will argue that this is "just business". then "business" is fucked up.
3. this question requires a clearer definition of the word "entertainer". i mean i think there is a difference between an entertainer and an artist. but even if we don't make that distinction, i think the way we view porn stars is comparable to how we view entertainers. entertainers have to try to earn our respect through things like talent. i doubt that most of you respect porn stars as talented, you're just like "damn that person is hot". and you have to be hot to be a porn star. so they're different here.
also, i mean i don't know if i'd say that actors are dehumanized or objectified. this probably can be true, but it doesn't make any sense to claim that it's always true, whereas with pornography, it may not ALWAYS be true that the people are being objectified, but i'd say that it USUALLY is, because that's sort of the whole point of how pornography is regularly used. i'm not claiming that this is a moral absolute, because like i said i don't believe in many, if any, moral absolutes. if you don't know the difference between objective morality and absolute morality, look it up. or, read the book "the moral landscape" by sam harris.
4. i never said to abandon old tradition, i said that we have abandoned old traditions. like human sacrifice. i mean our understanding of morality builds and evolves with our overall knowledge. there are plenty of things i admire of humans from the past, that had to live without the internet or television.
the dehumanization thing is not purely sexual, that's just one aspect of it. i'm wary of alot of sexual practices because i view them as objectification or dehumanization, but that's not where it ends.
i don't understand the logic of the case that someone can objectify the idea of sex. i'm not too worried about objectifying an idea, because an idea is not a person. the only thing i can think of is that maybe what you're referring to makes people obsess over sex?
and the idea that jerking off to memories or something is not always dehumanizing. you could be, in a sense, reliving a past sexual experience with a partner that you considered somewhat special and that you had a strong emotional connection with, other emotions can take place from this memory, and sure, pleasure may be one of the feelings, but other feelings of satisfaction with your partner and a love for him or her is probably there too. if you're jerking off to a memory of something you did with someone you deeply care for you're almost certainly not going to view them as a sex object.
this shit may or may not matter to you, but it matters to me
help my asshole is covered in a butt what do i do
my anus is ruptured and won't stop oozing poopy HELP ME SOMEONE
what the fuck you're sick in the head you sicko
Quote from: trent bortknob on September 30, 2011 04:13 PM3. this question requires a clearer definition of the word "entertainer". i mean i think there is a difference between an entertainer and an artist. but even if we don't make that distinction, i think the way we view porn stars is comparable to how we view entertainers. entertainers have to try to earn our respect through things like talent. i doubt that most of you respect porn stars as talented, you're just like "damn that person is hot". and you have to be hot to be a porn star. so they're different here.
Some porn stars are very talented in what they do. I usually watch videos because of what the women do in them, not how they look. I mean sure, if the women in a video are really unattractive, I'm much less likely to watch it. At the same time, there are a lot of times where I pass up watching videos with extremely hot women for videos with women who look less attractive simply because of what's done in a video.
"hi i watch porn! do you watch porn? lets watch porn! im a faggot!!"
:slut: :slut: :slut:
porn more like corn
heh
Oh wow this thread is a bazillion pages now and not about Facebook now, I am out of the loop. :drool:
(https://thebackalleys.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fuserserve-ak.last.fm%2Fserve%2F126%2F1937185.png&hash=94a7815e7bd1d39eba592acc06e11bd543a47d3e)
cornhole
corn more like adjourn!
hehs
wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww