The lonely and often cruel world of porn

Hammer89

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Stagliano, yeah, but yet you highlight that it was being shot with a handheld camera like that's a bad thing. Handheld camera shot porn is what made Stagliano a multi millionaire. Himself, Seymore Butts and Pier Woodman transformed the industry at a time when it was all fake boobs and cheesy dialogue features. Today almost all porn is Gonzo, so much so that the name is almost redundant as a result and the girls making the most from the industry are shooting that genre.

Is that when they shag puppets?

philstar

some guys would prefer to talk about food than ****...

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

_Dara_

Irish Guitarist wrote: »

Naked women are great but I've never liked porn involving a man and a woman. I've never seen an attractive woman and thought "she'd look even better if she was having sex with a man who isn't me" or "her face would be even nicer with jizz all over it".

Kinda my issue with porn too. I have no interest in seeing any kind of money shot ever. I love men, I am as heterosexual as they come but seeing random semen will never, ever do it for me.

I love good sex scenes in films. You know, where you can feel the chemistry between the actors and it's shot in a really hot, sexy manner. Porn is just totally devoid of that, it really is like watching a National Geographic documentary about human mating rituals.

I guess really, I just think that from the outside, sex generally doesn't look pretty unless there is a talented director with a good eye behind the camera. That's why orgies just seem like they'd be a totally awkward, unerotic experience to me actually.

Hammer89

I honestly worry about teenage lads these days because of porn. I think there's going to be a lot of young fellas experiencing a much more severe case of teenage angst than previous generations, based on earlier exposure to the type of content which can and does leave fully-grown men insecure, let alone actual children. If you have a smart phone, which kids invariably do these days, then you have the same access as everybody else to material which, frankly, teenage boys and girls (and possibly even younger) are not ready to see.

I'm sure there are ways in which parents can limit what their kids can search for on their phones, but is it a no-brainer that most of them have such restrictions on theirs? I really wouldn't have thought so. I don't even know if you can limit these things on an iPhone - I'd hope so - but the fact I don't know means some 43-year-old mother isn't going to know either. The onus is certainly on her to investigate if that function exists, but let's assume that many of them don't; some might not care, some might forget, and some probably don't realise the consequences of their child watching hardcore porn.

What are the consequences? Well, I don't know because thankfully my generation was nowhere near as exposed, but I can imagine. We didn't have the same accessibility, which means we were shielded from the harsh reality that our cocks are small in comparison to male porn actors because we didn't have the basis for comparison. By the time we figured it out, we were old enough to know that the men in porn represent a tiny percentile of men.

Problem is, teenagers who aren't even fully grown in that department do have that basis of comparison which we lacked and it's going to wreak havoc on their mental state. Most of them are perfectly normal as far as size goes but by the time they're fully grown they'll have believed for quite a while that they're inadequate because of their early exposure. It's going to f*ck up their confidence, their self-esteem, their sex life and, saddest of all, their capacity to form intimate relationships with the opposite or same sex going forward in life.

The penis is a big deal and, because of porn, I believe it's a way bigger concern for young lads now than probably ever before.

fryup

remember what it says in the good book....

"You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY'; but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart"

Matthew 5: 27-28

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

take everything

take everything wrote: »

Nothing against porn as such but I'm always amazed at the extremity of men's fantasies when it comes to porn. Psychosexually there is a whole lot of fcuking weirdos out there.

Could the same not be said about any entertainment really? Could you imagine what any of the soap operas would be like if they showed how most people _actually_ live their lives? Instead they show an extreme caricature version of life.

Why would porn be any different? Do we really want to see a porn video of two drunks coming home with half eaten kebabs - go for a quick whizz in the bathroom - then rut a bit for 90 seconds missionary before falling asleep?

Like any entertainment medium - people often want an exaggerated or distorted version of reality to watch on screen. Not everyone of course. Myself and my girlfriends watch mostly abby winters porn which is pretty tame and straight forward as porn goes and short of outright amateur is probably closer to how "real" people have sex than most porn is.

But I guess it depends exactly what you mean by extreme or weird. But generally I have not seen much in the way of fantasy or imagination in most porn I have seen. Perhaps you have examples of what you mean?

take everything wrote: »

And there's only one way porn goes like any drug or food addiction. Escalation. Boiled frog analogy.

You started that analogy from the viewpoint of addiction though. Most people are not addicted to food or drugs. Most people use their drugs (if any) and food in moderation.

So not only do I not think all addictions escalates in the first place - I am not sure an analogy starting from the point of addiction is a fair one. Like food and drugs - I doubt most users of porn are addicted.

If someone has a porn addiction then their problem is one of addiction though - not one of porn.

fryup wrote: »

I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart

Not sure what relevance a bronze age advocate of thought crimes has to the thread really - but thought crime is not really a thing these days outside places like North Korea.

Hammer89 wrote: »

I can imagine. We didn't have the same accessibility, which means we were shielded from the harsh reality that our cocks are small in comparison to male porn actors

I am not convinced that is an issue for many really. Many of us grew up doing PE and swimming using the school changing rooms where we very quickly found out what our relative size to our peers were.

As for comparing ourselves to actors - be it porn or otherwise - do many people do that? Could the same not be said about watching James Bond or many Hollywood movies when we feel inadequate in comparison to the chiselled bodies of the actors there too? In a world of Hollywood movies and glamour magazines is there any reason to single out porn for selecting actors that might make us feel relatively inadequate?

sbsquarepants

JupiterKid wrote: »

Indeed, the exposure of some porn actors has had devastating consequences for them.

I doubt too many of them are really the private type!

Here's a crazy idea - if you don't want mammy and daddy to know about the intimate details of your sex life, don't film yourself getting bummed by an entire football team and then put it on the fúcking internet!

Hammer89

Deleted User wrote: »

I am not convinced that is an issue for many really. Many of us grew up doing PE and swimming using the school changing rooms where we very quickly found out what our relative size to our peers were.

As for comparing ourselves to actors - be it porn or otherwise - do many people do that? Could the same not be said about watching James Bond or many Hollywood movies when we feel inadequate in comparison to the chiselled bodies of the actors there too? In a world of Hollywood movies and glamour magazines is there any reason to single out porn for selecting actors that might make us feel relatively inadequate?

I'm pretty sure the majority of men would opt for a nine-inch mickey over six-pack abs if you gave them the choice. I think it's a much bigger source of envy, perhaps because there's absolutely nothing they can do about it, which isn't the case when they see a sculpted body.

As for the school thing, that didn't happen in my school. I didn't see anyone's knob in school.

sbsquarepants

Hammer89 wrote: »

I'm pretty sure the majority of men would opt for a nine-inch mickey over six-pack abs if you gave them the choice..

I'd love a six-pack alright.....but not if it means having a smaller mickey:D

Hammer89

Hammer89 wrote: »

I'm pretty sure the majority of men would opt for a nine-inch mickey over six-pack abs if you gave them the choice.

Not sure that has anything to do with my point really - but even if it did I am not sure I would pretend to speak for "most men" in this regard. You certainly do not speak for me.

For example if I was single I would likely also realise that when trying to attract the opposite sex it is your looks not your penis that is on display to do the attracting.

But as I said my point was not based on discussing one envy _relative_ to another. The point is just that our entire entertainment industry is pumping out things that potentially make people feel inadequate (the effect of glamour magazines on the self esteem of young girls is one I have oft heard discussed for example).

So it just seems odd to me that some people single out porn for doing this when it is by far not an issue that area of the entertainment industry has any exclusivity over by far.

o1s1n

fryup wrote: »

remember what it says in the good book....

"You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY'; but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart"

Matthew 5: 27-28

There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

Ezekiel 23:20

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

123shooter

Deleted User wrote: »

Not sure that has anything to do with my point really - but even if it did I am not sure I would pretend to speak for "most men" in this regard. You certainly do not speak for me.

For example if I was single I would likely also realise that when trying to attract the opposite sex it is your looks not your penis that is on display to do the attracting.

Not always true as my old mate had a big mickey and even though some women pulled faces of disgust at such a mention of the thing, first chance they got they seemed to avail of it.

But as I said my point was not based on discussing one envy _relative_ to another. The point is just that our entire entertainment industry is pumping out things that potentially make people feel inadequate (the effect of glamour magazines on the self esteem of young girls is one I have oft heard discussed for example).

But no one wants to look at ugly people. In porn they do as all shapes, sizes and looks appear in it.

123shooter

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Depends whether one goes dogging in June or January.

Hammer89

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I'm well aware of that and I mentioned that point in the longer post but I wouldn't trust a 14-year-old lad to reach that conclusion. I think he'd be questioning his own size and that's the point.

When me and my friends were 14, we weren't burdened by such worries because the only pornographic material available to us was either a women-only magazine or Men and Motors or something.

123shooter

123shooter wrote: »

Not always true

Nothing ever is Which is why I try to right in general terms rather than absolutes. But in the vast majority of cases - I suspect - when people are finding other people attractive (or not) it is not their genitalia that is on display so much as the general shape and form of their whole physique.

123shooter wrote: »

But no one wants to look at ugly people. In porn they do as all shapes, sizes and looks appear in it.

Which just makes it yet more baffling in cases where people single out porn for narratives of "It makes the viewer feel inadequate". As you say here - not only can other areas of the entertainment industry be accused of it - sometimes they can be accused of it more so.

Hammer89 wrote: »

I'm well aware of that and I mentioned that point in the longer post but I wouldn't trust a 14-year-old lad to reach that conclusion. I think he'd be questioning his own size and that's the point.

It is possible for sure - but probably more so for people like yourself who apparently got through those years without anything else to compare it to. Many of us however during our teen years had innumerable experiences of nudity with our peers - many in school or swimming and the like - to have a more general expectation built up.

So perhaps the problem here is not porn - but the exposure of children and teens to nudity (or in this case the lack of exposure) in a way that maintains an ignorance that porn then exacerbates.

Now I need a punch line about "porn" and words ending in "bates" but I can not quite get one.

CruelCoin

deandean wrote: »

Porn stars doing escort work you say? Wow. Out of interest, any links?

I've never understood the distinction people try to make between being a porn star and being an escort/hooker.

Whether you are filmed or not, you're having sex for money.

It's no better than a janitor calling himself a "custodial engineer"

CruelCoin

CruelCoin wrote: »

I've never understood the distinction people try to make between being a porn star and being an escort/hooker. Whether you are filmed or not, you're having sex for money.

I can see a few distinctions there though. In terms of pornography you are selling all kinds of rights to privacy - and rights to your image - and the distribution of your product by a third party in a way an escort-client encounter would not. An escort can stop working and take their product off the market so to speak - in a way someone who's image is being sold by a third party never can.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

CruelCoin

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

They're not professionals though?

The majority of porn is "starring" wayward 18-20 year olds who leave the industry only 2 years after entering it.

Many of them only know who they'll be shagging once they see them enter the room. That's as close to shagging joe soap as makes no difference.

123shooter

CruelCoin wrote: »

They're not professionals though?

The majority of porn is "starring" wayward 18-20 year olds who leave the industry only 2 years after entering it.

Many of them only know who they'll be shagging once they see them enter the room. That's as close to shagging joe soap as makes no difference.

No different to a club on a Friday and Saturday night then. So nothings changed since the year dot except since we got religion or morals some people become obsessed with other peoples sex lives.

Hammer89

CruelCoin wrote: »

Many of them only know who they'll be shagging once they see them enter the room. That's as close to shagging joe soap as makes no difference.

That isn't true. Male and female porn stars have yes and no lists in regards to who they will and won't work with.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

evolving_doors

JupiterKid wrote: »

Now, let me get this clear by pointing out that this is NOT a right-wing moralistic rant against porn. I'm sure many here watch and enjoy porn - as I have and do. Beautiful women and men in exotic locations having endless sex. But you can definitely watch too much and TBH it gets boring and formulaic after a while.

But there is a darker side to the porn industry. Many "actors" are used by the industry and then spat out on the scrap heap. Only a very select few ever "make it" big and most have to supplement their often meagre porn incomes with escort work.The availability of so much free porn on the internet compared to VHS and DVD formats in the 1980s and 90s means shrinking revenues for porn studios and their "stars." Many end up isolated, lonely, turning to drugs for comfort. Many take their own lives.

Even 50 years after the sexual revolution, there is still such a social stigma about pornography that most stars never use their real names and never disclose their porn careers to their families. Indeed, the exposure of some porn actors has had devastating consequences for them.

Some articles below on the issue. Food for thought...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johnhenry-westen/want-to-stop-sex-traffick_b_6563338.html


https://www.thefix.com/content/keeping-it-porn-industry


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/lisa-ann-on-how-demand-for-extreme-porn-is-damaging-new-performers-that-does-break-you-down-as-a-a6838751.html


https://www.out.com/news-opinion/2013/05/09/porn-problem-star-death-arpad-miklos

Kinda sounds like the GAA

CruelCoin

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Are you really asking me to provide documented proof for the average pornstar age? To what end, whats the point of that?
Does it change the fact they shag for cash?

I'm not some sort of prude, my right arm is significantly stronger than my left....But there is some serious amount of gymnastics in this thread trying to paint them as women of vitue!

evolving_doors

CruelCoin wrote: »

Are you really asking me to provide documented proof for the average pornstar age? To what end, whats the point of that?
Does it change the fact they shag for cash?

I'm not some sort of prude, my right arm is significantly stronger than my left....But there is some serious amount of gymnastics in this thread trying to paint them as women of vitue!

Is that you George :pac:

razorblunt

There's 2 decent docs on Netflix about this, When Porn Ends and When Porn Ends 2 (should have called it "out the backdoor" or something" that has a very candid view on the whole thing. Some of the lads from the 70s saying lads nowadays are injecting liquid viagra into their knobs for scenes, some asked the question "what the hell are they going to do when they're my age?"

B.A._Baracus

^
Liquid Viagra?! that's insane :eek:

Hammer89

I had quite a lot of liquid viagra last weekend but I call it Orchard Thieves

Erik Shin

Hammer89 wrote: »

I had quite a lot of liquid viagra last weekend but I call it Orchard Thieves

So....you put it in cider?......

hytrogen

Hammer89 wrote:

I had quite a lot of liquid viagra last weekend but I call it Orchard Thieves

A great laxative for weight watchers too, prost!

Bygumbo

A bit off topic, but I find it really weird to imagine the stuff that children are exposed to nowadays.

You know yourself, back before the internet it was VERY difficult to get your hands on any kind of pornography (as a secondary school student). And even then a mate might get his hands on an olders brothers magazine and thatd be it.

I think its fair to say that if your child has a phone in school, they are seeing the darkest ends of humanity. I dont care what anyone says, that has to be having some seriously bad impact.

Not talking about straight up sex, im talking all the bizarre, twisted stuff like "playing" with faeces (2 girls, one cup), sado masochism, beastiality etc.

Foooooked up stuff.

Erik Shin

Bygumbo wrote: »

A bit off topic, but I find it really weird to imagine the stuff that children are exposed to nowadays.

You know yourself, back before the internet it was VERY difficult to get your hands on any kind of pornography (as a secondary school student). And even then a mate might get his hands on an olders brothers magazine and thatd be it.

I think its fair to say that if your child has a phone in school, they are seeing the darkest ends of humanity. I dont care what anyone says, that has to be having some seriously bad impact.

Not talking about straight up sex, im talking all the bizarre, twisted stuff like "playing" with faeces (2 girls, one cup), sado masochism, beastiality etc.

Foooooked up stuff.

Just tell them to look up blue waffle and they'll put those phones away for 5 years at least!

Bygumbo

Erik Shin wrote: »

Just tell them to look up blue waffle and they'll put those phones away for 5 years at least!

Nah, they'll look it up (im not going to!), and then it will warp their frizzled brains just that bit more. And in 5 years time they'll come at all of us like the children of the corn and slaughter everyone.

Children of the Porn!

Kermit.de.frog

Wibbs wrote: »

Sex is about as physically intimate as you can get with another human being.

I'm confuzzled.

What could possibly be either the same or more physically intimate than sex?

CruelCoin

evolving_doors wrote: »

Is that you George :pac:

I've seen his name pop up around the place.

The old goat get fired or something?

CruelCoin

CruelCoin wrote: »

But there is some serious amount of gymnastics in this thread trying to paint them as women of vitue!

There is no gymnastics required to suggest that merely having sex for money does not make them any more - or less - virtuous than you or I or the rest of us.

There is nothing morally wrong with sex between consenting adults that I can see. There is nothing morally wrong with trading sex for money between consenting adults that I can see either. And ditto for having sex on camera.

So I am not seeing why their virtue comes into it at all. They seem pretty equivalent to the rest of us in general so far.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

sbsquarepants

Deleted User wrote: »

So I am not seeing why their virtue comes into it at all. They seem pretty equivalent to the rest of us in general so far.

I think there are 2 schools of thought regarding sex in general.

There are those who see it as some sort of "special" act, to be shared only with someone you care for. Then there are those who see it as basically just something that feels good.

The 2 are fairly irreconcilable I've noticed.

sbsquarepants

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I think there are 2 schools of thought regarding sex in general. There are those who see it as some sort of "special" act, to be shared only with someone you care for. Then there are those who see it as basically just something that feels good. The 2 are fairly irreconcilable I've noticed.

Sure, but even within a relationship however one can maintain both views. With my partners sometimes we "make love" and have sex for the romantic intimate connection of it all. And sometimes we simple go at it for the pure animalistic pleasures of it. And sometimes it is a mix of the two.

But I think I see what you mean. That peoples issue with porn and prostitution tends to stem from people taking what sex is for them - what it means for them - and projecting it on to an idea that it should be and mean the same to everyone else.

So anyone who moves away from _their_ narrative of how sex should be is somehow wrong. Be it porn or prostitution or homosexuality or whatever.

I believe however - once sex is between consensual adults - that it is not for us to judge who people have sex with - how or in what positions - or what their motivation for doing it is.

sbsquarepants

Deleted User wrote: »

I believe however - once sex is between consensual adults - that it is not for us to judge who people have sex with - how or in what positions - or what their motivation for doing it is.

I agree with you 100%

My point is for someone like yourself (and myself, i'll freely admit) who sees it first and foremost as a nice time to be had - it can quite easily also have the added dimension of being something special, given the right circumstances. It's akin to a walk on the beach -usually quite nice, but a walk on the beach at sunset with someone you love has that little bit extra magic attached.
But for someone who sees sex as always something special - it is practically impossible to see the appeal in just fúcking a randomer for the craic, or less still for money.

They tend to get moralistic and judgemental - how could you possibly be happy doing porn or being a hooker - you're trading your dignity for cash, you're just an unhappy, troubled slut.
Which could be the case sometimes I suppose - but it's by no means guaranteed.

CruelCoin

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Anecdotal evidence, the odd tv program etc.

I'm hardly going to peer review the entire body of evidence prior to a bloody AH post...

andekwarhola

Porn is like McDonalds for me. Maybe once a year, I get an irrational impulse to view it (usually on trajectory from something else) and then very shortly wonder why I bothered.

While I wouldn't for a minute advocate censoring it or making blanket assumptions about the people that work in the trade, the objectification angle has a point.

Not so much in the hoary old 'exploitation' sense but more that's it's personally bewildering to me how somebody can find endless 'decontextualized' close ups of sex acts erotic or stimulating.

pajo1981

andekwarhola wrote: »

Not so much in the hoary old 'exploitation' sense but more that's it's personally bewildering to me how somebody can find endless 'decontextualized' close ups of sex acts erotic or stimulating.

We're not all wired the same. Some people get off watching a stiff cock slide in and out of a young woman, some don't. You're just happen to be the latter.

andekwarhola

pajo1981 wrote: »

We're not all wired the same. Some people get off watching a stiff cock slide in and out of a young woman, some don't. You're just happen to be the latter.

Thanks for clearing that up, Dr Ruth.

NIMAN

I think that dating show on British TV kinda shows how low society has sunk these days.

The one where people are chosen on their sexual organs.

I do fear for the future and what are kids are going to see.

andekwarhola

NIMAN wrote: »

I think that dating show on British TV kinda shows how low society has sunk these days.

The one where people are chosen on their sexual organs.

I do fear for the future and what are kids are going to see.

They do say the biggest sexual organ is the brain so they're obviously all not getting much.

Professor Moriarty

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I'm confuzzled.

What could possibly be either the same or more physically intimate than sex?

Cannibalism.