Your entire argument is an irrelevancy.
Haha, I called your arguments an irrelevancy, and here you go, using that same word back to me in return. How charmingly child-like that is.
These are not synonyms. Juggling is a performance, but it is not a fiction.
You’re arguing with voices in your head. No one suggested that they are synonyms. They are three different things. And porn is all three. …You know, like, take a man that is orange-hued, and vile, and half-witted. To say that is not to suggest that those three descriptors are synonyms.
Porn is, generally speaking, usually, a scripted show, a performance, and the depiction of what you're seeing is fictive. In that sense, porn is a performance, it is fiction, it is a show.
And yes, The Crow is fiction. Because you can't actually get resurrected by a crow spirit to get revenge on evil-doers, as portrayed in the movie.
Once again you stumble blindly into irrelevancies. The genre of the movie is irrelevant. Even if the movie were a true-to-life documentary, nevertheless the depiction of it by actors on screen, that depiction is fictive.
Read the above carefully. Loudly, if need be. Repeat as many times as necessary, till some understanding penetrates through, finally.
Except, again, IT IS REAL. They are actually having sex. You can frame it as fiction all you want, but Poem is correct on this and you are wrong, it's actual sex.
Read what I said to you about theprestige’s Brandon Lee analogy one more time. Loudly, slowly. Then one more time again.
Then, if understanding still eludes you, then read the following:
If a martial artist --- Brandon Lee, for instance --- throws around perfectly “real” martial arts moves with other martial artists in a martial arts flick, then that performance is still fictive. Why? Because they’re doing what the director’s telling them to do. That depiction ---- say that word aloud, clearly, one more time so understanding finally seeps through --- that DEPICTION is what is fictive.
And god damn it, I'll never forgive you for making me agree with Poem,
Don’t worry about it. The agreement per se or the disagreement per se of someone that is lacking in intellectual integrity, is a matter of little worth. Your opportunistic agreement with him now, for reasons that are entirely transparent, makes no difference at all.
but that's how bad your argument is. You keep trying to hang your hat on other words liker "performance", and yes, it's a performance. That doesn't make it not real in the ways that matter.
It is has been explained to you already, very clearly, that the only reason why I was talking to Poem about the fictive nature of the depiction of porn, is because when you realize a thing is fictive and not real, then you don’t try to emulate that in everyday life. Like jumping from towers, like fighting singlehanded and unarmed with five armed men, like the industrial scale sex often depicted in porn. So yes,
that makes porn not real in the only sense that really matters, in context of what I’d said to Poem in my post that you chose to first start your asinine and fundamentally disingenuous commenting on.
It's not trivial, and you're the one who's completely wrong on it, not Poem. Poem has gotten so many things wrong in this discussion, but not this point. And the fact that she's wrong on other points isn't going to make me go along with you on this when you're the one who is wrong.
Certainly this disagreement is completely trivial, when compared with our disagreement over your endless attempts, elsewhere, to defend actual evil. I thought this relatively trivial disagreement might actually have been a opportunity for you to actually try to try on the intellectual integrity thing a bit, just for a change. Which I see you resolutely refuse to.
That’s fine, I don’t mind, it’s kind of fun engaging with your endless contortions and your indefatigable twisting and turning, on something relatively trivial like this. At least so far it is, although I suppose after a point it might start to get seriously boring.
