What is porn?
I am not going to tell you what porn is, as its subjective.
This is the great problem when we talk about porn, it means different things to different people.
One model told me she does not do porn, but simply worked up to open leg and toys. For her this was not porn.
One on-line definition is:
This definition suggests that porn must be nude or involved in a sexual act, yet there are plenty of ‘porn’ sites dedicated to clothed women only.
This is why when it comes to porn, one has a problem in who defines what is porn.
Page 3 can simply state its art. Clearly there is no sex involved, and the photographs are often taken (if not always) by professional photographers, who one is sure would consider themselves artists, and as such what they produce is art.
The problem I find when I listen to people talk about porn, is that its very clear that they have there own ideas on porn, ad unless they say what they believe porn is, then one cannot engage in a true discussion, as you may be talking about something completely different. This is where when Gail Dines refuses (as she did on at least one film) to define porn, it makes us wonder what she is on about. Gail Dines in the films I watched seems to suggest that porn is the act of full intercourse.
Thus I wonder if she would include such as OnlyTease as porn [NSFW Sample] or Art-Lingerie [NSFW Sample]. Tegan Brady [NSFW Sample] (I put NSFW but to be honest you do not see anything rude) appears to not show any rude parts. Would this be classed as porn or not?
This is why I do believe that if you are to talk about porn (pro or anti porn) then you should state what you consider to be porn.
I would suggest that kissing is a ‘sexual act’. As such could it not be argued that due to this being a sexual act, it should be considered as porn. As such if you ban porn, should you ban any book, advert, or film with any reference to such act?
The Stop Porn Culture website (stoppornculture.org) under Facts and Figures ‘Our Culture is Porn Culture’ seems to suggest porn covers (or what they refer to as porn culture) is that “It includes street prostitution, brothels, ‘massage parlors’, strip clubs, human trafficking for sexual purposes, phone sex……..”.
This means that when they talk about Porn Culture, they may not be talking about porn as in the above definition. This is why when organisations such as these, do need to define at the start clearly what in fact they mean. Otherwise those listening will probably think they are being ‘educated’ on porn when they may not be. This is an example how the word porn can be misused for convenience.
One thing I find is that often porn is seen by those who are anti porn, as some form of academic research that needs to be analysed to death. So every word spoken, every scene, every movement, every camera angel, the models in the shoots, the models age, the models sex, the colour of the model, and so on, must all be questioned and examined. There must be subtext in everything.
Sociology and psychological meanings must be found and explored in everything about the shoot. When in truth its meant for pleaser, and that’s all. Marquis de Sade life was based on the maxim that “the principle of philosophy is the search for pleasure.” And for me that is all porn is, a ‘pleasure’ of life. No different to eating chocolate. You do not examine it, you simply enjoy.
This is the great problem when we talk about porn, it means different things to different people.
One model told me she does not do porn, but simply worked up to open leg and toys. For her this was not porn.
One on-line definition is:
“Books, magazines, films, etc. with no artistic value that describe or show sexual acts or naked people in a way that is intended to be sexually exciting.” [LINK]But this itself then asks the question what ‘artistic value’ is, and who decides that. Art becomes subjective. One also has to decide if something is intended to be sexually exciting.
This definition suggests that porn must be nude or involved in a sexual act, yet there are plenty of ‘porn’ sites dedicated to clothed women only.
This is why when it comes to porn, one has a problem in who defines what is porn.
Page 3 can simply state its art. Clearly there is no sex involved, and the photographs are often taken (if not always) by professional photographers, who one is sure would consider themselves artists, and as such what they produce is art.
The problem I find when I listen to people talk about porn, is that its very clear that they have there own ideas on porn, ad unless they say what they believe porn is, then one cannot engage in a true discussion, as you may be talking about something completely different. This is where when Gail Dines refuses (as she did on at least one film) to define porn, it makes us wonder what she is on about. Gail Dines in the films I watched seems to suggest that porn is the act of full intercourse.
Thus I wonder if she would include such as OnlyTease as porn [NSFW Sample] or Art-Lingerie [NSFW Sample]. Tegan Brady [NSFW Sample] (I put NSFW but to be honest you do not see anything rude) appears to not show any rude parts. Would this be classed as porn or not?
This is why I do believe that if you are to talk about porn (pro or anti porn) then you should state what you consider to be porn.
I would suggest that kissing is a ‘sexual act’. As such could it not be argued that due to this being a sexual act, it should be considered as porn. As such if you ban porn, should you ban any book, advert, or film with any reference to such act?
The Stop Porn Culture website (stoppornculture.org) under Facts and Figures ‘Our Culture is Porn Culture’ seems to suggest porn covers (or what they refer to as porn culture) is that “It includes street prostitution, brothels, ‘massage parlors’, strip clubs, human trafficking for sexual purposes, phone sex……..”.
This means that when they talk about Porn Culture, they may not be talking about porn as in the above definition. This is why when organisations such as these, do need to define at the start clearly what in fact they mean. Otherwise those listening will probably think they are being ‘educated’ on porn when they may not be. This is an example how the word porn can be misused for convenience.
From stoppornculture.org 8th April 2014
One thing I find is that often porn is seen by those who are anti porn, as some form of academic research that needs to be analysed to death. So every word spoken, every scene, every movement, every camera angel, the models in the shoots, the models age, the models sex, the colour of the model, and so on, must all be questioned and examined. There must be subtext in everything.
Sociology and psychological meanings must be found and explored in everything about the shoot. When in truth its meant for pleaser, and that’s all. Marquis de Sade life was based on the maxim that “the principle of philosophy is the search for pleasure.” And for me that is all porn is, a ‘pleasure’ of life. No different to eating chocolate. You do not examine it, you simply enjoy.
No comments:
Post a Comment