Moderated What's wrong with porn?

[Southwind17]

Hi, JFrankA. I removed a long-winded reply to your comment about poker, so I'll be as brief as I can here. I think what it comes down to is our individual punishment/reward mechanism. One of my examples was that, as a young girl, someone asked me to kill them. I pointed out that I had previously thought that I should, had even considered how best to go about it, but at the moment the opportunity presented itself, that was a threshold I couldn't cross...because I loved that person more than I hated them. Which was a difficult thought process for me to grasp at that age.

In poker. Some are content with nickel games, some cannot get satisfaction unless the stakes are higher, and then some won't feel any satisfaction unless not only the stakes are high, but the game is illegal. Our punishment/reward mechanisms aren't all the same, and so some people must push harder to feel any reward. I don't know why that is...but at times all of our minds go places they shouldn't.

As with the example about myself as a young girl, someone else in that same position might have made a different choice. I think that there is no way to predict that. If our minds can think it, though, we can do it...so I think there is a fine line between fantasy and reality...but there is also that differing level of what it takes for each of us to achieve satisfaction. Some people are easy to please, some aren't. Some people are easily amused, some aren't. I think it only becomes a problem when we forget about the punishment part of the punishments and rewards, and seek satisfaction while disregarding any consequences to ourselves and others.

Which is essentially exactly what I'm saying. It's all about people's different appetite for risk and satisfaction and where they draw the line between what they would like to do and what they're prepared to do.

 

[JFrankA]

Of course (Nicole Kidman)! So what's the pay differential between two "regular" male/female porn "actors".

Sheesh, SW, you've completely ignored my post!

But that's irrelevant. It's the law of supply and demand. In the world of studios like Wicked Pictures and Vivid Video, it's supply and demand. The woman are generally the bigger stars and paid more simply because that's what the male heterosexual audience wants, and that's what they cater to.

Studios that cater to gay porn will obviously have male stars be paid more, certain ones, again depending on the popularity.

Studios that cater to an audience that like transsexuals would pay more to a tranny than a genetically born woman.

It's the simple law of supply and demand. Whatever is working for the business gets paid more. Simple.

And that's the same for the non-porn entertainment industry. I would image someone like Keanu Reeves would be paid more than someone like Elisha Cuthbert. (Sorry, I think she's drop dead ) even though there may be people who go to a show because she's in it, it's Keanu who has the popularity enough to receive more pay.

And as to your point:

You miss the point. Nicole Kidman is extremely scarce!

Your point is completely irrelevant.

There's only one Elisha Cuthbert, but she doesn't make as much as Nicole Kidman. There's only one Banachek but he's not nearly as much as David Copperfield. There's only one X but she/he's not doesn't make as much as Y.

Your point is irrelevant. It's not that they are scarce, it's because they are popular. Maybe even better managers, better decisions, etc. Not scarcity. Quite a difference.

 

[JFrankA]

Which is essentially exactly what I'm saying. It's all about people's different appetite for risk and satisfaction and where they draw the line between what they would like to do and what they're prepared to do.

If you are saying that most sane people have a limit to what they desire, and that limit is the difference between play and reality, with a clear idea of both, then I think we are arguing semantics.

I think most people desire the "play" but not the "real". Your saying it a limit thing.

Have I got that right? If I do, we are probably arguing the same side.

 

[sugarb]

Which is essentially exactly what I'm saying. It's all about people's different appetite for risk and satisfaction and where they draw the line between what they would like to do and what they're prepared to do.

Okay, I do understand that...but...I agree with JFrankA in that, just because someone, as an example, has a rape fantasy, that does not mean they actually want to be raped. I think the argument is that, through play, that fantasy can be safely fulfilled. You seem to disagree with that?

 

[Southwind17]

You're a bit wrong. There are masochists who do enjoy pain. They're called "Pain Sluts" (Yes, a term used for both women and men)

OK - maybe not a good example.

It's a desire for the fantasy - not necessarily the reality.

I really cannot work out what you mean by "desire for the fantasy". To my mind that can only mean one thing: a desire to have the fantasy. But a fantasy is a manifestation of a desire, and so is reality (in the case of rape, for example). So fantasy and reality are just different manifestations of desires played out at different levels, depending on one's ability to draw a line.

Actually, you're right there. The point I'm trying to make is that one may desire the idea of playing the game, but wouldn't desire the real thing.

Now we need to be careful here. I believe you're confusing a desire to pretend with a desire for reality. Paintball, for example, could be described as "pretend war". It clearly isn't real war! If you fantasise about playing paintball per se (i.e. just for the sake of playing paintball), or even if you actually go ahead and play paintball, that is completely different from fantasising about fighting in Afghanistan, for example. If, however, you fantasise about fighting in Afghanistan and you go and play paintball to simulate fighting in Afghanistan (i.e. not just for the sake of playing paintball), then that's different - very different. That's why published simulated rape could be dangerous. Whilst the actors are only "innocently" pretending [playing paintball] the observer could be fantasizing about raping [fighting in Afghanistan].

I've known people who have very extreme fantasies. In fact, I know one who had a murder fantasy. She wanted to feel like she was being murdered. But the reality was that she didn't want to be murdered, (and, I might add, no one wanted to kill her), but she wanted to feel it, but of course, without going through the reality.

You cannot validly claim what I've highlighted JFrankA. You cannot possibly know what she wanted and didn't want. All you can validly claim is that she didn't allow herself to be murdered when push came to shove. She drew a line and wasn't prepared to cross it. Some people don't draw a line though, and they go through with it. Why do you think their fantasy is any different from the woman you allude to?

Really?

Yes.

You're resisting that desire to rob a bank?

Not just any bank. It would need to be like the heist on Heat, or similar. But the point is it's not exactly a "burning" desire, so it's very easy to resist. To put it into context, I also have desire right now to eat chocolate. That's a much stronger desire. Why? Because I know I'm capable of succumbing. You really should think carefully about what we're discussing here JFranK before expressing surprise. I'm sure if you analyze yourself deeply enough your surprise will actually emanate from what you yourself are really desirous of!

Do you have a desire to rob every bank you pass by? Is it calling to you to just take the money? Is the thrill of being chased by the police calling to you? Is the desire to really hurt or possibly really shoot people part of it? Do you desire having hostages who are begging for their lives? Are you resisting the urge to possibly kill an innocent person just to make sure you get away with the money? Do you want to be on the run constantly? Worried that any moment you are going to arrested and thrown in jail?
You are really resisting those desires?

I'm hoping you get it now before you embarrass yourself!

 

[JFrankA]

OK - maybe not a good example.


I really cannot work out what you mean by "desire for the fantasy". To my mind that can only mean one thing: a desire to have the fantasy. But a fantasy is a manifestation of a desire, and so is reality (in the case of rape, for example). So fantasy and reality are just different manifestations of desires played out at different levels, depending on one's ability to draw a line.


Now we need to be careful here. I believe you're confusing a desire to pretend with a desire for reality. Paintball, for example, could be described as "pretend war". It clearly isn't real war! If you fantasise about playing paintball per se (i.e. just for the sake of playing paintball), or even if you actually go ahead and play paintball, that is completely different from fantasising about fighting in Afghanistan, for example. If, however, you fantasise about fighting in Afghanistan and you go and play paintball to simulate fighting in Afghanistan (i.e. not just for the sake of playing paintball), then that's different - very different. That's why published simulated rape could be dangerous. Whilst the actors are only "innocently" pretending [playing paintball] the observer could be fantasizing about raping [fighting in Afghanistan].


You cannot validly claim what I've highlighted JFrankA. You cannot possibly know what she wanted and didn't want. All you can validly claim is that she didn't allow herself to be murdered when push came to shove. She drew a line and wasn't prepared to cross it. Some people don't draw a line though, and they go through with it. Why do you think their fantasy is any different from the woman you allude to?


Yes.


Not just any bank. It would need to be like the heist on Heat, or similar. But the point is it's not exactly a "burning" desire, so it's very easy to resist. To put it into context, I also have desire right now to eat chocolate. That's a much stronger desire. Why? Because I know I'm capable of succumbing. You really should think carefully about what we're discussing here JFranK before expressing surprise. I'm sure if you analyze yourself deeply enough your surprise will actually emanate from what you yourself are really desirous of!


I'm hoping you get it now before you embarrass yourself!

I'm not going to embarrass myself.

There's a difference between resisting the reality and not desiring the reality, even though in both conditions, the desire to play the fantasy of the reality it there.

In what you said:

Not just any bank. It would need to be like the heist on Heat, or similar.

as soon as you put that condition in, it becomes a controlled situation, a fantasy bank. Therefore, not reality.

Now, I will say that there may be some people who do resist the reality, but I don't think that's most people.

 

[Southwind17]

But that's exactly my point. SW is arguing that all people who do fantasy rape has the desire for real rape somewhere. Not all people do, and yes, there are levels of risk. But until someone chooses to do the real thing, then it's just simple play.

Yes, there are levels of play, but there is a definite, clear line between play and reality. If someone knows the consequences, or doesn't bother to look at the consequences and still chooses the reality, then that person did desire the reality.

SW seems to believe that if one desires the fantasy they automatically desire the reality. That's just untrue.

UNTRUE! ... UNTRUE! ... I strongly suggest you check yourself here JFrankA, given what you were vehemently espousing about opinions, facts and data earlier. I'm not saying what I think is necessarily true (I wrote as much above), but you cannot possibly validly claim it's untrue, unless, of course, you have ... well, you know what!

I honestly think this has hit a nerve with you JFrankA, seriously, and it seems pretty obvious to me why (nothing personal, and no offense intended).

 

[JFrankA]

UNTRUE! ... UNTRUE! ... I strongly suggest you check yourself here JFrankA, given what you were vehemently espousing about opinions, facts and data earlier. I'm not saying what I think is necessarily true (I wrote as much above), but you cannot possibly validly claim it's untrue, unless, of course, you have ... well, you know what!

I honestly think this has hit a nerve with you JFrankA, seriously, and it seems pretty obvious to me why (nothing personal, and no offense intended).

No, you haven't hit a nerve. I'm not upset and typing in caps, SW. You are.

You are the one who said "Desire = fantasy = reality (if you're incapable of resisting....)" I am merely saying that that isn't the case mostly.

You seem to think that all people who have a desire for a fantasy, deep down, has the desire for the reality and are merely resisting the reality, in essence struggling with it.

I say that's not true in most cases. I say that in most cases people who may desire the fantasy doesn't desire the reality. The difference between fantasy and reality is a whole new ballgame.

...and please, stop trying to psycho-analyze me before you embarrass yourself.

 

[Southwind17]

Sheesh, SW, you've completely ignored my post!

Sorry JFRankA - I didn't mean to - which one?

Your point is completely irrelevant.
There's only one Elisha Cuthbert, but she doesn't make as much as Nicole Kidman. There's only one Banachek but he's not nearly as much as David Copperfield. There's only one X but she/he's not doesn't make as much as Y.
Your point is irrelevant. It's not that they are scarce, it's because they are popular. Maybe even better managers, better decisions, etc. Not scarcity. Quite a difference.

Oh come on JFrankA - macro economics 101. Two separate pricing issues:

Popularity: There's only one Budweiser, but ..., there's only one Heineken, but ..., there's only one San Miguel, but ... Popularity and price go hand in hand. The more popular the higher the price per unit. But this is where price elasticity of demand comes in. You can read up on it.

Scarcity: More porn actresses available generally the lower the pay generally and vice versa. And again price (pay) elasticity of demand kicks in. Which explains why Elisha Cuthbert (whoever she is) doesn't get paid double what she actually gets. What do you think would happen if she demanded double what she earns? The same as would happen if you did! Again, you can read up on it. I'm doing enough educating here (not that anybody really seems capable of learning much!)

 

[JFrankA]

Sorry JFRankA - I didn't mean to - which one?


Oh come on JFrankA - macro economics 101. Two separate pricing issues:

Popularity: There's only one Budweiser, but ..., there's only one Heineken, but ..., there's only one San Miguel, but ... Popularity and price go hand in hand. The more popular the higher the price per unit. But this is where price elasticity of demand comes in. You can read up on it.

Scarcity: More porn actresses available generally the lower the pay generally and vice versa. And again price (pay) elasticity of demand kicks in. Which explains why Elisha Cuthbert (whoever she is) doesn't get paid double what she actually gets. What do you think would happen if she demanded double what she earns? The same as would happen if you did! Again, you can read up on it. I'm doing enough educating here (not that anybody really seems capable of learning much!)

Funny how you lump porn actresses into one "item" but beer and non-porn actresses are individually separated.......

Don't you think that some porn actresses make more money than others?

Let me put it this way. Tera Patrick makes more money than Shandra Sweet. Does Nichole Kidman makes more money than Tera Patrick?

Come on, SW, if you're going to argue your point, please be consistent. Further, this point is still irrelevant.

 

[Southwind17]

If you are saying that most sane people have a limit to what they desire, and that limit is the difference between play and reality, with a clear idea of both, then I think we are arguing semantics.
I think most people desire the "play" but not the "real". Your saying it a limit thing.
Have I got that right? If I do, we are probably arguing the same side

Not semantics JFrankA. There's no limit to what one can desire (come on, you should know that! ) The desires are what they are - you can't really control that. The "limiter" is whatever it is within us that prevents us from pursuing those desires that we know we shouldn't (for whatever reason - its illegal, it will upset someone, I can't afford it, I'm too lazy, etc.)

 

[JFrankA]

Oh, and just so you know:

Elisha Cuthbert.

Kim from the show 24, she was also in "The Girl Next Door".

One of the few blonds I find yummy.


ETA: Oops. Sorry about the size.....

 

[JFrankA]

Not semantics JFrankA. There's no limit to what one can desire (come on, you should know that! ) The desires are what they are - you can't really control that. The "limiter" is whatever it is within us that prevents us from pursuing those desires that we know we shouldn't (for whatever reason - its illegal, it will upset someone, I can't afford it, I'm too lazy, etc.)

If you aren't going to say we are arguing semantics, then fine.

I disagree. There are limits. You've listed them. I believe for most people those limits take away desire not add to resistance of doing the reality.

 

[Southwind17]

Okay, I do understand that...but...I agree with JFrankA in that, just because someone, as an example, has a rape fantasy, that does not mean they actually want to be raped. I think the argument is that, through play, that fantasy can be safely fulfilled. You seem to disagree with that?

Yes, I do disagree. I think part of them is desirous of them being raped. However, as I keep writing, if the opportunity presented itself (and they had a choice!) they would think about it rationally (if that's even needed!) and resist wholeheartedly. What one desires and what one is consciously prepared to pursue are controlled by two completely different mechanisms (I believe!), although the first, of course, is the driver for the second, when it is pursued.

 

[porch]

It's time for a summary update, in light of the growing body of evidence that there is at least one real danger to porn. If you are a woman, and you participate in certain kinds of porn, you risk losing the respect of one Southwind17. Or, at the very least, he may use precisely open-ended wording to allude to something to that effect in order to teach us all. So, uh, look out for that.

 

[sugarb]

Yes, I do disagree. I think part of them is desirous of them being raped. However, as I keep writing, if the opportunity presented itself (and they had a choice!) they would think about it rationally (if that's even needed!) and resist wholeheartedly. What one desires and what one is consciously prepared to pursue are controlled by two completely different mechanisms (I believe!), although the first, of course, is the driver for the second, when it is pursued.

Strangely enough, Southwind17, I think you and JFrankA are actually on the same page. Maybe if it goes back just one step further, the two of you can reach a better understanding (unless I'm way off).

Ugh. I don't know how else to phrase it, so here goes: what you are saying is, I think (and correct me if I'm wrong) that, in order for a person to even have a rape fantasy (perpetrator or victim), they had to at some point have been aroused by rape itself. Which really wouldn't be unusual, but it just isn't something people generally admit.

So what *you* are saying, I think, is that the fantasy develops from a reality. Kind of...reality -> interest/arousal-> fantasy -> maybe to reality again, maybe not, depending on the individual.

It isn't at all unusual for people to be secretly aroused by taboo things, or even violence. We just generally don't admit it for fear of being labelled "crazy" or "insane".

Am I getting this right?

 

[JFrankA]

Strangely enough, Southwind17, I think you and JFrankA are actually on the same page. Maybe if it goes back just one step further, the two of you can reach a better understanding (unless I'm way off).

Ugh. I don't know how else to phrase it, so here goes: what you are saying is, I think (and correct me if I'm wrong) that, in order for a person to even have a rape fantasy (perpetrator or victim), they had to at some point have been aroused by rape itself. Which really wouldn't be unusual, but it just isn't something people generally admit.

So what *you* are saying, I think, is that the fantasy develops from a reality. Kind of...reality -> interest/arousal-> fantasy -> maybe to reality again, maybe not, depending on the individual.

It isn't at all unusual for people to be secretly aroused by taboo things, or even violence. We just generally don't admit it for fear of being labelled "crazy" or "insane".

Am I getting this right?

I agree with you SugarB in your entire post, but one point SW and I are disagreeing on is this: I think SW is saying, and correct me if I'm wrong SW. Is that the reason most people don't desire the reality is because of a because of consequences of that reality causes a person to resist her/his desire for the reality to happen.

What I'm saying is that the reason most people don't desire the reality is because the consequences doesn't cause one to resist the reality, but actually takes away the desire for that reality.

 

[MontagK505]

Oh, and just so you know:

Elisha Cuthbert.

[qimg]http://interracialscentral.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/elisha-cuthbert-11.jpg[/qimg]

Kim from the show 24, she was also in "The Girl Next Door".

One of the few blonds I find yummy.


ETA: Oops. Sorry about the size.....

The size is just fine!

BTW I don't have any rape fantasy's about this or any woman. But, she is yummy!

 

[Rairun]

I tend to agree with JFrankA. If someone has a rape fantasy (or any other fantasy, for that matter), I don't think it's unreasonable to claim that they desire it to become reality. If they had a chance to make their fantasy come true exactly as they imagined it, they might choose not to go through with it for various reasons (they're in a monogamous relationship, etc.), but there would be some resisting involved.

Do I sound like I disagree with him? Maybe, but I actually don't. The point here is that it's often impossible to "make one's fantasy come through exactly as one imagined it." It's likely that the person who fantasizes about rape wouldn't actually enjoy the full reality of the act. It's so easy to idealize even the most run-of-the-mill sex acts, let alone something one's never done before. I'd be willing give people the benefit of doubt and assume they are aware of that important difference.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I tend to agree with JFrankA. If someone has a rape fantasy (or any other fantasy, for that matter), I don't think it's unreasonable to claim that they desire it to become reality. If they had a chance to make their fantasy come true exactly as they imagined it, they might choose not to go through with it for various reasons (they're in a monogamous relationship, etc.), but there would be some resisting involved.

Why resisting? Just because the fantasy of something or playing mimicing something is fun or a turn on does not mean reality is. Resisting is saying that they feel that they would want the reality of it at some level. For some people they that may be true. But do you really think that if someone has a fantasy of being raped, and the chance to be raped like in their fantasy they would feel comflicted about avoiding being raped?

This seems patently rediculus to me, but it is just changing the side from a fantasy about being raped to a fantasy about being a rapist.

Do I sound like I disagree with him? Maybe, but I actually don't. The point here is that it's often impossible to "make one's fantasy come through exactly as one imagined it." It's likely that the person who fantasizes about rape wouldn't actually enjoy the full reality of the act. It's so easy to idealize even the most run-of-the-mill sex acts, let alone something one's never done before. I'd be willing give people the benefit of doubt and assume they are aware of that important difference.

The point is you are agreeing that someone who has a fantasy of X but wouldn't do X would feel any desire to do X if the personal consequences were removed.