http://marquee.blogs.cnn.com/2011/11/15/ex-porn-star-sasha-grey-i-wont-stop-reading-to-kids/?iref=obnetwork

Yeah this whole "scandal" is so dumb. People are stupid.

Yeah..cause 1st graders totally know who sasha grey is!

Even if they did, we bring actual convicted felons into schools for scared straight programs, but we're not ok with someone who used to work in a fully legal industry enjoyed by millions that the kids have never even heard of?

But....but.... she's a porn star! They aren't people!

They are the spawn of Satan!

Rented Tritium wrote:Even if they did, we bring actual convicted felons into schools for scared straight programs, but we're not ok with someone who used to work in a fully legal industry enjoyed by millions that the kids have never even heard of?

Violent criminals are perfectly normal..but anything to do with sex?!?!

Easy E wrote:But....but.... she's a porn star! They aren't people!

People can't do good things AND things you don't approve of in the same lifetime!

Yeah, like society has decided that not only should you not do porn, but if you DO, you are now tainted for life and can't do anything else

Easy E wrote:But....but.... she's a porn star! They aren't people!

They are the spawn of Slaanesh!

Fixed that for you!

But yeah, its just a non-sensical moral high ground. Besides, I'd rather have a porn star reading to the kids than a person with a history of violent crime, it seems safer!

Oh man, my "WTF" senses are tingly again. So she had sex on camera......and? Shes done with that and moving on, good for her. I dont see a problem with reading to kids at all, regardless of what her former career was

What KC! she's done with that!.... *sobs quietly* ...'done' with that! i'm going back to school now! ......

KingCracker wrote: Shes done with that and moving on, good for her.

Disagree. She gets to do whatever she wants, but you're implying that a legal career that she seems to be proud of was inherently worse than what she is doing now. In a subtle way, you are furthering the views that are causing this whole thing.

I doubt you mean it, but this is the subtle sexism of value judgement.

She is doing what SHE wants with her career. Good for her for THAT.

I think she got some critical acclaim for a role in a recent Hollywood movie.

However, the name escapes me. Perhaps I'm just crazy. I don;t really want to look up her IMDB here at work.

Easy E wrote:I think she got some critical acclaim for a role in a recent Hollywood movie.

The Girlfriend Experience (2009), one of Soderberg's little cheapy film experiments; the reviews are middling at best. The general consensus seems to be that are some interesting ideas but they aren't really explored, and that Sasha is not so good. The non-Critic reviews are more negative. It runs a whopping 77 minutes.

I dont get it, dont almost all adults have sex lol yet there still allowed to teach children. When on earth would a child know who she is anyway, if they do id be more worried about there parenting lol

I dont get the problem with this.

I'll bet some of the teachers have even made sex tapes on their own time.

She hasn't done anything illegal. She's reading books to children who shouldn't have any idea who she is (and if they do then their parents need a beating). There's no conceivable way she could harm these children short of... I have no idea. Are people worried that after she's done reading the Bearnstein Bears she's going to have some porn star come up and they'll act it out X rated style? I mean... wha?

Tyyr wrote:after she's done reading the Bearnstein Bears she's going to have some porn star come up and they'll act it out X rated style?

can't stop thinking about this

I think the parents are just jelious that they didnt get to be read to by Sasha grey

I can see it now:

Dad: OMG Thats a porn star reading to our kids
Mother: How would you know
Dad:

can't stop thinking about this

Well there's my good deed for the day.

"Ohhh Papa Bear!"

AtomicEngineer wrote:I dont get it, dont almost all adults have sex lol yet there still allowed to teach children.

Most don't film themselves being peed on while having anal sex and then sell the tape.

Maybe the worry is they will google her name?

They do if they're rap stars... wait, he was the one doing the peeing.

I doubt a 1st Grader is going to google the name of the lady who read him a book. As far as he knows she's just some pretty lady who bored his ass off when he'd rather be outside setting things on fire.

ah little heratics in the making,

Milk for the milk god!

And theres far more a chance they would google peoples names that they see on TV alot of them have a shady past lol

But then again corruption seems inescapable now adays, This one kid in town in the street was talking about porn to his friend, i was like wtf! because he was about 10.

And really you can google anything and hit porn.

Tyyr wrote:They do if they're rap stars... wait, he was the one doing the peeing.

I doubt a 1st Grader is going to google the name of the lady who read him a book.

We aren't really talking about the first graders, but their parents. It really isn't all that out of the realm of possibility. I know a 4 year old that knows how to spell and use a search engine to some extent. In 2 more years he would be that much better at it.

So there isn't confusion, I personally don't care if she is reading books to kids and think the parents are overreacting. I also think she did this for the attention becuase I can't imagine her being stupid enough to believe being a well known prostitute was going to be overlooked.

And R. Kelly isn't a 'rap star', being that he doesn't rap.

Ahtman wrote: I also think she did this for the attention becuase I can't imagine her being stupid enough to believe being a well known prostitute was going to be overlooked.

Lotta sexism ITT.

What if it was Sylvester Stallone?

We aren't really talking about the first graders, but their parents. It really isn't all that out of the realm of possibility. I know a 4 year old that knows how to spell and use a search engine to some extent. In 2 more years he would be that much better at it.

Sure, and my kid's not far off it either. The crux of my arguement isn't that kid's can't search for someone, in this day and age I think you're safer assuming they can. It's that they have zero motivation to do it. They have no reason to think this woman is anything but another adult who wants to read them a book unless the adults around her make a big deal about it.

On top of that I wouldn't be giving my 6 year old unrestricted and unsupervised time on the computer anyway. Finally, if you're worried about your kid finding out about porn then letting them anywhere near google is a bad idea to begin with.

So to be clear, I think the odds that any of the kids she reads to would google her is incredibly low, if they're paying any attention at all to begin with.

I also think she did this for the attention becuase I can't imagine her being stupid enough to believe being a well known prostitute was going to be overlooked.

I don't think you've got to attribute her wanting to do this to either malice or idiocy. I won't exclude either, but there does exist the possibility that she is genuinely trying to "turn over a new leaf" and do something that would be viewed as good and beneficial. Again, look at the audience she's going for, kids who are too young to have any idea who she is and young enough that the odds of them even trying to find out is about zero.

If she wanted attention there are other ways to go about it.

And R. Kelly isn't a 'rap star', being that he doesn't rap.

The amount I care couldn't be measured with an electron microscope.

Tyyr wrote:
If she wanted attention there are other ways to go about it.

Like, idk, being a porn star

What KC! she's done with that!.... *sobs quietly* ...'done' with that! i'm going back to school now! ......

Dude, you dont even have colour TV where you come from but who knows, if you redo school there might be some by the time you come out again

Anyway, this link on the topic is way more fun:
http://thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=i_hate_sasha

Maddox for the win!

Rented Tritium wrote:

Ahtman wrote: I also think she did this for the attention becuase I can't imagine her being stupid enough to believe being a well known prostitute was going to be overlooked.

Lotta sexism ITT.

What if it was Sylvester Stallone?

I don't think you know what sexism is.

If he had sex for money I would call him a gigolo.

Ahtman wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

Ahtman wrote: I also think she did this for the attention becuase I can't imagine her being stupid enough to believe being a well known prostitute was going to be overlooked.

Lotta sexism ITT.

What if it was Sylvester Stallone?

I don't think you know what sexism is.

If he had sex for money I would call him a gigolo.

You implied that she was either stupid or seeking attention by READING TO CHILDREN, then called a legal profession enjoyed by millions "prostitution", a common sexist pejorative for women who exercise agency over their sex lives.

Rented Tritium wrote:

Tyyr wrote:
If she wanted attention there are other ways to go about it.

Like, idk, being a porn star

There is no such thing as bad press they say, and some people crave attention. If anything I am giving her credit for being media savvy.

Rented Tritium wrote:
You implied that she was either stupid or seeking attention by READING TO CHILDREN, then called a legal profession enjoyed by millions "prostitution", a common sexist pejorative for women who exercise agency over their sex lives.

No. He's saying that how could she not see this coming? She's a porn star. Of course there's going to be feedback.

Being a porn star is legal. I grant you that. But I'd be ashamed of my sister if she became one. Just like I'd bitch her out if she did something for Girls Gone Wild.

It's only a step away from prostitution. And a small step at that.

Rented Tritium wrote:then called a legal and profession enjoyed by millions "prostitution"

I know that this may be hard for some of you to grasp, but I'm being more critical of society by calling her that then of her. Don't misconstrue my feelings, I think she is unattractive and does terrible films (I don't mean porn, I mean her films specifically), but it is her choice to do them. My problem is that if you get paid to have sex on film you are a 'porn star', but if you get paid to have sex without a film crew, you are just a prostitute; one is legal becuase a camera crew is there, and the other is not.

Also:

Pyriel wrote:
]What KC! she's done with that!.... *sobs quietly* ...'done' with that! i'm going back to school now! ......

Dude, you dont even have colour TV where you come from but who knows, if you redo school there might be some by the time you come out again

Anyway, this link on the topic is way more fun:
http://thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=i_hate_sasha

Maddox for the win!

Damn you Pyriel *shakes fist in the air* I shouldn't shake it around so provacatively if sasha's around! .... and my t.v is colour! I know her surname isn't what she should appear on my 1950's hamster powered picture device!

kronk wrote:
No. He's saying that how could she not see this coming? She's a porn star. Of course there's going to be feedback.

And she's saying that because she sees it coming, she MUST be seeking attention. There's no middle ground where you don't care because you know those people are wrong and you are just doing your thing. You are either seeking attention by purposefully going against the grain or you are STUPID. His post does not allow for her to take ANY high ground. That is how it is sexist.

Being a porn star is legal. I grant you that. But I'd be ashamed of my sister if she became one. Just like I'd bitch her out if she did something for Girls Gone Wild.

And where does that shame come from? It comes from you knowing what other people will say.

It's only a step away from prostitution. And a small step at that.

Yeah except for the whole millions of people enjoy porn and there's absolutely nothing wrong with it thing. Except that.

Rented Tritium wrote:And where does that shame come from? It comes from you knowing what other people will say.

That is a nice guess, but sadly wrong. Would you like to try again, and this time put some thought into the answer?

Ahtman wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:then called a legal and profession enjoyed by millions "prostitution"

I know that this may be hard for some of you to grasp, but I'm being more critical of society by calling her that then of her. Don't misconstrue my feelings, I think she is unattractive and does terrible films (I don't mean porn, I mean her films specifically), but it is her choice to do them. My problem is that if you get paid to have sex on film you are a 'porn star', but if you get paid to have sex without a film crew, you are just a prostitute; one is legal becuase a camera crew is there, and the other is not.

You're right. Prostitution should be legal.

Also:
white knight

Yes, having strong opinions about something that you are talking bad about makes me a white knight. Now you're dehumanizing me, too. My actual opinions as a person don't matter anymore, I'm just swooping in and defending her because she's a damsel. Yay more subtle sexism!

:rolleyes:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ahtman wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:And where does that shame come from? It comes from you knowing what other people will say.

That is a nice guess, but sadly wrong. Would you like to try again, and this time put some thought into the answer?

Fill me in then. Why else would one feel shame at their sister's activities? The one I said was the nicest one.

Rented Tritium wrote:My actual opinions as a person don't matter anymore, I'm just swooping in and defending her because she's a damsel. Yay more subtle sexism!:rolleyes:

You sure like to make things up, put words in other peoples mouths, and misread statements, don't you? I still think you have no idea what sexism is, as you keep misusing the the term.

Rented Tritium wrote:

Being a porn star is legal. I grant you that. But I'd be ashamed of my sister if she became one. Just like I'd bitch her out if she did something for Girls Gone Wild.

And where does that shame come from? It comes from you knowing what other people will say.

No. It comes from having self respect. Nice try, though.

Rented Tritium wrote:

kronk wrote:
No. He's saying that how could she not see this coming? She's a porn star. Of course there's going to be feedback.

And she's saying that because she sees it coming, she MUST be seeking attention. There's no middle ground where you don't care because you know those people are wrong and you are just doing your thing. You are either seeking attention by purposefully going against the grain or you are STUPID. His post does not allow for her to take ANY high ground. That is how it is sexist.

Man. That's totally NOT what sexist means. Where did you go to school? Were you home schooled?

kronk wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

Being a porn star is legal. I grant you that. But I'd be ashamed of my sister if she became one. Just like I'd bitch her out if she did something for Girls Gone Wild.

And where does that shame come from? It comes from you knowing what other people will say.

No. It comes from having self respect. Nice try, though.

Explain to me, like I'm an idiot, how having sex on film for money means you have no self respect.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ahtman wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:My actual opinions as a person don't matter anymore, I'm just swooping in and defending her because she's a damsel. Yay more subtle sexism!:rolleyes:

You sure like to make things up, put words in other peoples mouths, and misread statements, don't you? I still think you have no idea what sexism is, as you keep misusing the the term.

Hey, you posted a white knight picture, not me. Are you seriously blind to the subtext of "white knight"?

Rented Tritium wrote:

kronk wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

Being a porn star is legal. I grant you that. But I'd be ashamed of my sister if she became one. Just like I'd bitch her out if she did something for Girls Gone Wild.

And where does that shame come from? It comes from you knowing what other people will say.

No. It comes from having self respect. Nice try, though.

Explain to me, like I'm an idiot, how having sex on film for money means you have no self respect.

Wow. Just...wow. Carry on, oh great white knight.

This thread is goin g to be closed very soon, I see.

Rented Tritium,

Is someone close to you a porn star? We seem to have hit a nerve.

Subtlety failed then.

kronk wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

kronk wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

Being a porn star is legal. I grant you that. But I'd be ashamed of my sister if she became one. Just like I'd bitch her out if she did something for Girls Gone Wild.

And where does that shame come from? It comes from you knowing what other people will say.

No. It comes from having self respect. Nice try, though.

Explain to me, like I'm an idiot, how having sex on film for money means you have no self respect.

Wow. Just...wow. Carry on, oh great white knight.

No, seriously. I'm really dumb. Please connect the dots for me.

See, I just cannot see an actual connection beyond anecdotal correlation connecting doing porn to not having self respect. I want you to explain it to me.

This is the point where we realize that RT is not a reasonable on the subject, and to further feed him would be a senseless waste of time. He is so blinded on the subject that any reasonable discussion is a fools errand, as he seems to be the opposite end of the spectrum of those who want the industry shut down; instead of absolute destruction he seeks absolute acceptance.

Castiel wrote: Subtlety failed then.

Meh. I haven't seen any personal attacks, yet.

Just spirited conversation.

kronk wrote:Rented Tritium,

Is someone close to you a porn star? We seem to have hit a nerve.

There are women close to me.

When you imply that they have less agency than other people because of their career choices, you hit a nerve.

While it's bad that she is being... attacked for trying to do something good simply because of her background she should know that people's view on porn isn't exactly... accepting. Parents least of all.
Though if my sister was a porn star i would find that freaking hilarious...

Damn you Pyriel *shakes fist in the air* I shouldn't shake it around so provacatively if sasha's around!

Well that all depends on where you put your fist in the first place but do keep shaking...

No. It comes from having self respect. Nice try, though.

Self respect is a subjective thing. If you think being nude is not having self respect doesnt mean another person does.

Hey, you posted a white knight picture, not me. Are you seriously blind to the subtext of "white knight"?

Why anybody would be white-knighting on an only male forum is beyond me lol

It's only a step away from prostitution. And a small step at that.

A lot of "normal" dating can just as well be considered a form of prostitution or actually even worse, fraud, but nobody looses their self respect over that.

kronk wrote:

Castiel wrote: Subtlety failed then.

Meh. I haven't seen any personal attacks, yet.

Just spirited conversation.

Looks at post above the quoted one: Irony strikes again.

Rented Tritium wrote:

kronk wrote:Rented Tritium,

Is someone close to you a porn star? We seem to have hit a nerve.

There are women close to me.

When you imply that they have less agency than other people because of their career choices, you hit a nerve.

And there it is.

Thanks for explaining that. No need to discuss this with you further. You can't be reasonable about it.

Ahtman wrote:This is the point where we realize that RT is not a reasonable on the subject, and to further feed him would be a senseless waste of time. He is so blinded on the subject that any reasonable discussion is a fools errand, as he seems to be the opposite end of the spectrum of those who want the industry shut down; instead of absolute destruction he seeks absolute acceptance.

Pot, meet kettle.

Castiel wrote:

kronk wrote:

Castiel wrote: Subtlety failed then.

Meh. I haven't seen any personal attacks, yet.

Just spirited conversation.

Looks at post above the quoted one: Irony strikes again.

Try again. I was 100% on the mark, Castiel.

kronk wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

kronk wrote:Rented Tritium,

Is someone close to you a porn star? We seem to have hit a nerve.

There are women close to me.

When you imply that they have less agency than other people because of their career choices, you hit a nerve.

And there it is.

Thanks for explaining that. No need to discuss this with you further. You can't be reasonable about it.

I could have said the same thing after you said that getting naked on film meant someone had no self respect.

I forgot about the magical morality rays that shine from your skin and remind you that you are horrible person when you expose them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I've explained my position on this plenty and you guys keep coming back with "HURR DURR, WHY WOULD I NEED TO EXPLAIN THIS"

Thing is, my entire point is that the anti-porn business is so deep in you socially that you couldn't explain what's bad about it if you TRIED.

Rented Tritium wrote:
I could have said the same thing after you said that getting naked on film meant someone had no self respect.

I forgot about the magical morality rays that shine from your skin and remind you that you are horrible person when you expose them.

Being a Porn Star is not something to be proud of.

They should be ashamed. Have a nice day, RT. (Added to ignore).

kronk wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:
I could have said the same thing after you said that getting naked on film meant someone had no self respect.

I forgot about the magical morality rays that shine from your skin and remind you that you are horrible person when you expose them.

Being a Porn Star is not something to be proud of.

They should be ashamed. Have a nice day, RT. (Added to ignore).

Why?

Again, I've explained my position. Please explain yours. WHY is it not something to be proud of? Explain this.

kronk wrote:

Castiel wrote:

kronk wrote:

Castiel wrote: Subtlety failed then.

Meh. I haven't seen any personal attacks, yet.

Just spirited conversation.

Looks at post above the quoted one: Irony strikes again.

Try again. I was 100% on the mark, Castiel.

Gosh, you are argumentative! I would say that saying someone is incapable of reason for having a different point of view from you was a personal attack.

Also, please don't start arguing with me just because I tried to calm down the argument and have a sensible discussion.

kronk wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:
I could have said the same thing after you said that getting naked on film meant someone had no self respect.

I forgot about the magical morality rays that shine from your skin and remind you that you are horrible person when you expose them.

Being a Porn Star is not something to be proud of.

They should be ashamed. Have a nice day, RT. (Added to ignore).

Can i ask why?

Castiel wrote:

Ahtman wrote:This is the point where we realize that RT is not a reasonable on the subject, and to further feed him would be a senseless waste of time. He is so blinded on the subject that any reasonable discussion is a fools errand, as he seems to be the opposite end of the spectrum of those who want the industry shut down; instead of absolute destruction he seeks absolute acceptance.

Pot, meet kettle.

I'm not asking for anything more than a nuanced evaluation of a complex issue, not sure how that is the same thing at all. I don't even disagree with everything he says, just the degree to which he says it, and due to that it was obvious his stake in the discussion was more personal than just a simple discussion on the matter. Every criticism on the industry is seen as a personal attack, and means that something as simple as someone saying they wouldn't be happy if their sister were in porn translates to them shaming their sister and treating her badly, which is not what was said. It makes it difficult to hold a conversation where everything will be taken out of context and seen as an attack.

Castiel wrote:
Also, please don't start arguing with me just because I tried to calm down the argument and have a sensible discussion.

Don't worry. I won't.

If you can't see that you were trying to be provocative, then this conversation isn't worth my time, either.

Ahtman wrote:due to that it was obvious his stake in the discussion

I have a stake in ANY discussion I am in.

It is called taking debate seriously.

Thing is, my entire point is that the anti-porn business is so deep in you socially that you couldn't explain what's bad about it if you TRIED.

I´m waiting for the explanation also.

IF and I mean, if it is done voluntary and by own choice and doesnt cause direct harm to someone else then who is someone else to say it is shameful or bad if it isnt to the person doing it.

kronk wrote:

Castiel wrote:
Also, please don't start arguing with me just because I tried to calm down the argument and have a sensible discussion.

Don't worry. I won't.

If you can't see that you were trying to be provocative, then this conversation isn't worth my time, either.

So any time people challenge you to explain and defend your views, you bounce? Got it. Pretty sure you're earning my ignore list more than I earned yours.

kronk wrote:

Castiel wrote:
Also, please don't start arguing with me just because I tried to calm down the argument and have a sensible discussion.

Don't worry. I won't.

If you can't see that you were trying to be provocative, then this conversation isn't worth my time, either.

You yourself have been provocative towards me, and now that I defend myself you call me provocative? Not the first time I have seen you do this. You are a hypocrite, and I have no time for you.

I popped in to a thread that looked like it had potential to be a good dicussion, tried to calm it down and I get this from you?

This conversation isn't worth my time, and I shall be ignoring you from now on.

This whole controversy would go away if Sasha Grey were reading the kids the Bible.

Easy E wrote:This whole controversy would go away if Sasha Grey were reading the kids the Bible.

I knew I liked you.

We need to just not talk about cops anymore.

I'd like to think I'd have no problem with a family member in the porn business (in front of the camera). But I wouldn't be sure until it happened.

That said as long as they were happy and safe I can't see why it would be my problem if a family member chose to do it. But then again I'm for legal prostitution and weed so I'm a tainted source.

Easy E wrote:This whole controversy would go away if Sasha Grey were reading the kids the Bible.

She'd need to read the Qu'ran and other holy books to be PC as well though!

People complaining about the porn industry now.

Its like the clothes you wear, we all know that its made in some sweat shop in some poorer part of the world by basically slaves but nobody complains because you like the clothes.

Yeah its dirty but modern man likes it too much to stop it. Cant complain about it and use it at the same time lol

Rented Tritium wrote:

Ahtman wrote:due to that it was obvious his stake in the discussion

I have a stake in ANY discussion I am in.

It is called taking debate seriously.

There is a difference between being personally invested and invested. This is not a new thing, and it is recognized all the time in laws. There is a reason why a detective is not allowed to investigate crimes involving people they are related to are had a close personal relationship, and the same goes for doctors treating family members, just to list two examples. Our vision becomes myopic and we lose the ability to step back and take everything in. The person doing it rarely can tell they are. This isn't some new idea or crackpot psychology, but a well understood element of human nature, and has been for some time. There are degrees to which a person is invested into a discussion or subject, and they aren't all equal.

I like how you throw 'take debate seriously' as if that makes your points suddenly have more weight, or that only you are taking this seriously. It is more evidence of how your personal views are making you intractable and lash out. If you took debate as seriously as you say, you would have left that part off, as it makes you look desperate.

And I am done with this thread, as there really is no where else it can really go. They were wrong to throw fits but she was either foolish or cynical for going to a school under her porn stage name.

Hulksmash wrote:I'd like to think I'd have no problem with a family member in the porn business (in front of the camera). But I wouldn't be sure until it happened.

I actually feel the same way. If it ACTUALLY HAPPENED I might be irrationally freaked out by it.

But that's illogical. I'd have to get over it.

Rented Tritium wrote:

Hulksmash wrote:I'd like to think I'd have no problem with a family member in the porn business (in front of the camera). But I wouldn't be sure until it happened.

I actually feel the same way. If it ACTUALLY HAPPENED I might be irrationally freaked out by it.

But that's illogical. I'd have to get over it.

Here lies the truth of the matter!

Rented Tritium wrote:

kronk wrote:Rented Tritium,

Is someone close to you a porn star? We seem to have hit a nerve.

There are women close to me.

When you imply that they have less agency than other people because of their career choices, you hit a nerve.

Reality sucks.
You wanne be that knock yourself out, but don't expect to be judged positively for it.

Ahtman wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

Ahtman wrote:due to that it was obvious his stake in the discussion

I have a stake in ANY discussion I am in.

It is called taking debate seriously.

There is a difference between being personally invested and invested. This is not a new thing, and it is recognized all the time in laws. There is a reason why a detective is not allowed to investigate crimes involving people they are related to are had a close personal relationship, and the same goes for doctors treating family members, just to list two examples. Our vision becomes myopic and we lose the ability to step back and take everything in. The person doing it rarely can tell they are. This isn't some new idea or crackpot psychology, but a well understood element of human nature, and has been for some time. There are degrees to which a person is invested into a discussion or subject, and they aren't all equal.

I like how you throw 'take debate seriously' as if that makes your points suddenly have more weight, or that only you are taking this seriously. It is more evidence of how your personal views are making you intractable and lash out. If you took debate as seriously as you say, you would have left that part off, as it makes you look desperate.

And I am done with this thread, as there really is no where else it can really go. They were wrong to throw fits but she was either foolish or cynical for going to a school under her porn stage name.

You're the one who made claims about me personally. I have every right to toss a jab right back.

O.k so she has tought people in my village that missionary isn't the 'only' way, and she can read! and she's friendly! what's so bad with her? at least she's not preaching hatred on a bus!

kronk wrote:

Being a Porn Star is not something to be proud of.

They should be ashamed. Have a nice day, RT. (Added to ignore).

This seems harsh to me.. I saw Sasha Grey on a talk show once and she doesnt seem fethed in the head or anything.

Maybe you could just.. you know. Do it for the money?

I dont think it guarantee's that you have no sense of self respect or you should be ashamed. I mean, sure some might, but some arent.

For example, how much money we talking!?

I have plenty of self respect, I think I am totally awesome, and yet, if you offered me 5 million pounds to jack a donkey off on the nine o-clock news I would be tugging that donkey with dollar signs whirling around my eyes faster than you could say "sex pest"

Surely some people are just, well, confident enough to feth in front of people, unconcerned about what strangers think of them, and want the money?

Frazzled wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

kronk wrote:Rented Tritium,

Is someone close to you a porn star? We seem to have hit a nerve.

There are women close to me.

When you imply that they have less agency than other people because of their career choices, you hit a nerve.

Reality sucks.
You wanne be that knock yourself out, but don't expect to be judged positively for it.

Right, but he didn't say that just that she should expect it. Of COURSE she could expect it.

What he said was that she MUST be just seeking attention because there's NO OTHER REASON one might want to sail into known controversy. She couldn't POSSIBLY just want to do the right thing and ignore the haters.

Rented Tritium wrote:You're the one who made claims about me personally.

I said you were myopic on it becuase you were personally invested, which you admitted that you were. I didn't say you were an idiot, or that you were wrong, just entrenched.

Rented Tritium wrote:I have every right to toss a jab right back.

There are many things wrong with that sentence and sentiment. It also seems to be more evidence that proves my point.

Castiel wrote:
You yourself have been provocative towards me, and now that I defend myself you call me provocative?

Probably too late since you've put me on ignore, but oh well.

You were the one responding to me, not the other way around. Go back and read it. Take off your rose colored glasses, man.

Castiel wrote: Not the first time I have seen you do this. You are a hypocrite, and I have no time for you.

Thanks for the personal attack.

Rented Tritium wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:

kronk wrote:Rented Tritium,

Is someone close to you a porn star? We seem to have hit a nerve.

There are women close to me.

When you imply that they have less agency than other people because of their career choices, you hit a nerve.

Reality sucks.
You wanne be that knock yourself out, but don't expect to be judged positively for it.

Right, but he didn't say that just that she should expect it. Of COURSE she could expect it.

What he said was that she MUST be just seeking attention because there's NO OTHER REASON one might want to sail into known controversy. She couldn't POSSIBLY just want to do the right thing and ignore the haters.

Oh no, I'm not saying she did it for any reason but altruism. My point was in reference to the career choice statement. I'm a libertarian generally and don't really care. frankly I opened up the thread thinking this was the Borat guy.

Ahtman wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:You're the one who made claims about me personally.

I said you were myopic on it becuase you were personally invested, which you admitted that you were. I didn't say you were an idiot, or that you were wrong, just entrenched.

I like this little thing you're doing where because I'm serious about my positions, I'm somehow wrong in them.

Please keep the discussion on-topic and free of personal attacks. Thanks!

Frazzled wrote:
Oh know, I'm not saying she did it for any reason but altruism. My point was in reference to the career choice statement. I'm a libertarian generally and don't really care.

Ok well yeah, I don't disagree that people will judge you for all kinds of reasons and you shouldn't pretend it won't happen.

But some people were saying she should kowtow to those people or that her motivations were somehow different based solely on what those other people said.

Hey, only tangentally realted....

Here is something I don't understand.

To pay someone to have sex with you is illegal.

I can pay two people to have sex with each other, film it, and then sell the film, and it is legal.

Can someone explain to me why that makes sense?

Rented Tritium wrote:

Ahtman wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:You're the one who made claims about me personally.

I said you were myopic on it becuase you were personally invested, which you admitted that you were. I didn't say you were an idiot, or that you were wrong, just entrenched.

I like this little thing you're doing where because I'm serious about my positions, I'm somehow wrong in them.

See, you can't even read a simple sentence without coming up a convoluted, forced interpretation of it. It is as if you aren't actually reading what it written, but are guessing what you think is written. When you aren't listening to what the other person is saying, or actually reading what they are writing, there is little purpose in continuing, and it has nothing to do with right or wrong.

@Easy E: I think that is already being discussed here.

For more:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/08/12/colb.pornography/index.html

It doesn't. Legalize Prostitution and tax it!

Rented Tritium wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
Oh know, I'm not saying she did it for any reason but altruism. My point was in reference to the career choice statement. I'm a libertarian generally and don't really care.

Ok well yeah, I don't disagree that people will judge you for all kinds of reasons and you shouldn't pretend it won't happen.

But some people were saying she should kowtow to those people or that her motivations were somehow different based solely on what those other people said.

No, thats not me. In the words of the Immortal Bard: "We're in America now. We won't be bowing to you English Lords any more. "

Easy E wrote:Hey, only tangentally realted....

Here is something I don't understand.

To pay someone to have sex with you is illegal.

I can pay two people to have sex with each other, film it, and then sell the film, and it is legal.

Can someone explain to me why that makes sense?

I pointed that out earlier, and was called a sexist for it.

I don't see why porn stars should be ashamed. Are you ashamed that you have sex?

Easy E wrote:Hey, only tangentally realted....

Here is something I don't understand.

To pay someone to have sex with you is illegal.

I can pay two people to have sex with each other, film it, and then sell the film, and it is legal.

Can someone explain to me why that makes sense?

The explanation is that one is speech and one isn't. It's a shaaaky argument though and is only a few decades old. I fully expect both to be legal at some point in the future, though for different reasons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ahtman wrote:

Easy E wrote:Hey, only tangentally realted....

Here is something I don't understand.

To pay someone to have sex with you is illegal.

I can pay two people to have sex with each other, film it, and then sell the film, and it is legal.

Can someone explain to me why that makes sense?

I pointed that out earlier, and was called a sexist for it.

No you didn't. You called sasha grey a prostitute and claimed that you were making a cutting remark about society after confronted. Not only do I not think for a second that's what you meant, if you HAD meant that, you made your point HORRIBLY.

Ahtman wrote:I pointed that out earlier, and was called a sexist for it.

I'd say "sexy".

Sasha Grey doesn't do it for me, alas. I don't find that kind of, shall we say, "undercarriage destruction" to be sexy in the least.

I have to say that Ahtman has pretty much outlined my thoughts on the matter.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Rented Tritium wrote:No you didn't. You called sasha grey a prostitute and claimed that you were making a cutting remark about society after confronted. Not only do I not think for a second that's what you meant, if you HAD meant that, you made your point HORRIBLY.

She gets paid to have sex. It's not that much of a leap.

Right, yes. Calling someone a prostitute in the middle of a post is totally just you making a point about people.

Suuuure.

In short, recording/distribution of porn is one of its essential characteristics and is a form of expression protected by the First Amendment. Prostitution entails no protected expression.

Castiel wrote:I don't see why porn stars should be ashamed. Are you ashamed that you have sex?

Heh.

Depends who it was with and the specifics of what happened.

Castiel wrote:I don't see why porn stars should be ashamed. Are you ashamed that you have sex?

Depends how good i was...

Manchu wrote:In short, recording/distribution of porn is one of its essential characteristics and is a form of expression protected by the First Amendment. Prostitution entails no protected expression.

Just because it's legal or illegal has no bearing on what is right or wrong.

#occupythepornindustry

Um okay?

I actually feel the same way. If it ACTUALLY HAPPENED I might be irrationally freaked out by it.

But that's illogical. I'd have to get over it.

Exactly.
Social brainwashing makes for great illogical behavior.

O.k so she has tought people in my village that missionary isn't the 'only' way, and she can read! and she's friendly! what's so bad with her? at least she's not preaching hatred on a bus!

According to some she simply must be ashamed and have people see her as a lower form of human being over her previous choice of profession.

Maybe they are right but then maybe she chose to do what she did for whatever reason (good money? someone on a documentary said she had 800k saved from that, not bad for a 20-something year old)
and isnt ashamed or doesnt feel like being a less valuable human.

Manchu wrote:In short, recording/distribution of porn is one of its essential characteristics and is a form of expression protected by the First Amendment. Prostitution entails no protected expression.

Yep.

And while sex in private itself is protected since it's just 2 people communicating (or even freely assembling ), the exchange of money does allow for the states to control it as commerce.

I expect it'll end up legal not because of a ruling, but because states just slowly unban it over the next century.

purplefood wrote:

Castiel wrote:I don't see why porn stars should be ashamed. Are you ashamed that you have sex?

Depends how good i was...

I saw these responses coming!

Monster Rain wrote:

Manchu wrote:In short, recording/distribution of porn is one of its essential characteristics and is a form of expression protected by the First Amendment. Prostitution entails no protected expression.

Just because it's legal or illegal has no bearing on what is right or wrong.

#occupythepornindustry

It makes me pitch a tent.

Must be speech.

Um okay?

What´s so hard to understand?
After all it was perfectly legal in nazi germany to gas jews but that sure as hell didnt make it ok or moral now did it?

God damn, I just brought up Godwins law into this mess, oh well.

Reality-style porn really takes the piss out of the stilted argument that people in porn are only pretending to have sex.

Pyriel- wrote:

I actually feel the same way. If it ACTUALLY HAPPENED I might be irrationally freaked out by it.

But that's illogical. I'd have to get over it.

Exactly.
Social brainwashing makes for great illogical behavior.

O.k so she has tought people in my village that missionary isn't the 'only' way, and she can read! and she's friendly! what's so bad with her? at least she's not preaching hatred on a bus!

According to some she simply must be ashamed and have people see her as a lower form of human being over her previous choice of profession.

Maybe they are right but then maybe she chose to do what she did for whatever reason (good money? someone on a documentary said she had 800k saved from that, not bad for a 20-something year old)
and isnt ashamed or doesnt feel like being a less valuable human.

Yeah, that's the bottom line. People think that SHE should feel a certain way because OTHER PEOPLE think something.

Let's think about that.

People say that a human being should feel a certain emotion not because they want to , but because OTHER PEOPLE have a certain opinion.

That is the very definition of a loss of agency and that sentiment is at the absolute core of sexism.

Pyriel- wrote:

Um okay?

What´s so hard to understand?

Why someone would respond to a legal argument with a statement about morality. Morality was in no way implicated by my statement. It's like me responding to your post by posting "Flamingo delta seventeen by forty sandwiches for Tuesday."

Manchu wrote:Reality-style porn really takes the piss out of the stilted argument that people in porn are only pretending to have sex.

You know those are 100% scripted, right?

Castiel wrote:

purplefood wrote:

Castiel wrote:I don't see why porn stars should be ashamed. Are you ashamed that you have sex?

Depends how good i was...

I saw these responses coming!

I could make another joke here but frankly it's too easy...

Rented Tritium wrote:

Manchu wrote:Reality-style porn really takes the piss out of the stilted argument that people in porn are only pretending to have sex.

You know those are 100% scripted, right?

I'm talking about camshows more than "My First Audition" &etc.

People always tell you to do what you enjoy for a living, you know:
If you enjoy science, be a scientist.
If you enhoy music, be a musician.
etc.

So why if you enjoy sex shouldn't you be a porn star?

just some food for thought!

Manchu wrote:

Pyriel- wrote:

Um okay?

What´s so hard to understand?

Why someone would respond to a legal argument with a statement about morality. Morality was in no way implicated by my statement. It's like me responding to your post by posting "Flamingo delta seventeen by forty sandwiches for Tuesday."

Morality was definitely part of the context of this thread though.

purplefood wrote:

Castiel wrote:

purplefood wrote:

Castiel wrote:I don't see why porn stars should be ashamed. Are you ashamed that you have sex?

Depends how good i was...

I saw these responses coming!

I could make another joke here but frankly it's too easy...

So is she.

Rented Tritium wrote:No you didn't.

Actually I did, the reason I know that is becuase I was there, I can check the record, and in the following sentence you ever refer to the posts which did that, meaning even you know I did.

Rented Tritium wrote:You called sasha grey a prostitute and claimed that you were making a cutting remark about society

I claimed it becuase that is what I did. It is there for all to see and you seem to be the only one that doesn't see that.

Rented Tritium wrote:after confronted.

Confronted isn't really the right word. It implies more conflict than was present. I think you choose it becuase it makes you feel like your standing up to a bully, when at best I was chastised for not being as explicit as i should have been.

Rented Tritium wrote:Not only do I not think for a second that's what you meant

And again you are making things up and being myopic. It doesn;t matter what is said or done, you think you know what people mean, so what they actually say or do is irrelevant.

Rented Tritium wrote:if you HAD meant that, you made your point HORRIBLY.

I don't think I made it "HORRIBLY", but I agree that I was a bit obtuse initially, which is I why I clarified the point.

@MR: Decepticon verbiage smiling for the Mott's Applesauce because Sasha Grey fomented with carnivorous.

I mean, the sentence has Sasha Grey in it ...

I'm just messing with you. It seemed like you were implying that I thought a stilted legal argument had some bearing on morality and that kind of seemed out of nowhere to me.

i) Who's sasha grey/gray and ii) what's wrong with reading books?

ED: NVM read the article and now I'm curious!

Oh, I didn't think there was any actual rancor going on there Femnaw.

Honestly, the post you responded to originally was in no way intended to be taken seriously.

@Phototoxin:

Sasha Gray was a pron star who has tried to mainstream it with a role in Entourage and a movie called the Girlfirend Experience. She was famous for brutal anal scenes and blunt dirty talk.

There's nothing wrong with reading books.

Phototoxin wrote:i) Who's sasha grey/gray and ii) what's wrong with reading books?

Sasha grey is a dirty dirty pornstar who should be ashamed and should not show her face in public.

She's reading books in a secret pornstar way that makes the kids have sex. It's called the pink note.

This is the best thread of the year

Monster Rain wrote:Oh, I didn't think there was any actual rancor going on there Femnaw.

Honestly, the post you responded to originally was in no way intended to be taken seriously.

Sorry, I anticipated snowballing (no pun intended, given thread topic) and then Pyriel validated my expectations by implying that I'm a Nazi.

Castiel wrote:

purplefood wrote:

Castiel wrote:

purplefood wrote:

Castiel wrote:I don't see why porn stars should be ashamed. Are you ashamed that you have sex?

Depends how good i was...

I saw these responses coming!

I could make another joke here but frankly it's too easy...

So is she.

Isn't the point that she isn't easy? She wanted to be paid...
I mean if you're a slag and make a load of home movies that's fine but selling them in a regulated industry environment and being paid for it just makes it bad?

Phototoxin wrote:i) Who's sasha grey/gray and ii) what's wrong with reading books?

She's an ex-porn star.
Nothing... people have some sort of moral crisis when they see an ex-pornstar helping promote reading...

I think I understand what's going on here with the people who are upset. Maybe their real problem is actually with reading. I think the journalist may have his facts a bit out of order.

i) Who's sasha grey/gray and ii) what's wrong with reading books?

ED: NVM read the article and now I'm curious!

Oh boy. Someone´s gonna have a lat of catching up to do tonight

Manchu wrote:Honestly, the post you responded to originally was in no way intended to be taken seriously.

Sorry, I anticipated snowballing (no pun intended, given thread topic)

I would describe Sasha Grey's porn work as ambitious. It was very infrequently my sort of thing, but I was always impressed by it.

Sorry, I anticipated snowballing (no pun intended, given thread topic) and then Pyriel validated my expectations by implying that I'm a Nazi.

Not at all, I would never imply that you are a nazi, I simply implied you like to gas jews in your basement.

Better her than a violent criminal.



edit: wait, Manchu isn't a nazi? Next you're going to tell me that biccat isn't a liberal!

Woe is me, for my world has shattered!

Pyriel- wrote:

i) Who's sasha grey/gray and ii) what's wrong with reading books? ED: NVM read the article and now I'm curious!

Oh boy. Someone´s gonna have a lat of catching up to do tonight

Should be fun right? Although, along with others in this thread, I can't say I'm a fan of Sasha Grey. She's pretty and all but her scenes are way brutal.

Manchu wrote:I think I understand what's going on here with the people who are upset. Maybe their real problem is actually with reading. I think the journalist may have his facts a bit out of order.

That would certainly flip the argument...

@purplefood: I just figure that if people read more books they might not be so upset about a porn star promoting reading. So clearly, the real enemy here is reading.

Manchu wrote:@purplefood: I just figure that if people read more books they might not be so upset about a porn star promoting reading. So clearly, the real enemy here is reading.

I wouldn't have minded if a porn star came to my school and started reading to us...

edit: wait, Manchu isn't a nazi? Next you're going to tell me that biccat isn't a liberal!

Of course hes not a nazi, I was just pulling his chain for him joking at me for calling him a nazi.
I think the lack of smileys on both parts might have confused some people.

Mel: Since this is the funniest thread on dakka in a long time couldnt you do like a mad feminazi (pun intended) plunge into it and stir gak up even more?

Oh boy, I´m getting out of popcorn already.

@purplefood: Just don't ask me to tell you what she read to me.

Pyriel- wrote:

edit: wait, Manchu isn't a nazi? Next you're going to tell me that biccat isn't a liberal!

Of course hes not a nazi, I was just pulling his chain for him joking at me for calling him a nazi.
I think the lack of smileys on both parts might have confused some people.

I was hoping I had piled enough sarcasm on that post to set off anyone's sarcasm detector...

Threads like this are great! starting off with a 'normal' topic and then devolving into brocken bit wars between people and somehow spiralling into Nazi germany and gassing people in your basement! all because a lovely young lady who happens to enjoy copious amounts of rough sex decided to read to kids in a school! wow! I couldn't script this stuff! but it sure is entertaining to see what everyone thinks about the person! I wonder how many moral radar's are just set to internet mode right now? :-)

please keep it up it's quite interesting! I must write a paper on this one day..... no, seriously! :-)

I was hoping I had piled enough sarcasm on that post to set off anyone's sarcasm detector...

To bad you didnt see my sarcasm making fun of your sarcasm

Does this mean there wont be any feminazi input in here by you? Not even for fun?

Threads like this are great! starting off with a 'normal' topic and then devolving into brocken bit wars between people and somehow spiralling into Nazi germany and gassing people in your basement! all because a lovely young lady who happens to enjoy copious amounts of rough sex decided to read to kids in a school! wow! I couldn't script this stuff! but it sure is entertaining to see what everyone thinks about the person! I wonder how many moral radar's are just set to internet mode right now? :-)

please keep it up it's quite interesting! I must write a paper on this one day..... no, seriously! :-)

Things, it seems, have unfortunately abated some. I´ll try to kickstart them once just for lulz, if it doesnt do the trick then bummer, we are out of thread or everybody just went to have dinner.

Pyriel- wrote: trick then bummer

I ardly know er

So, as a follow-up.

If I pay someone to have sex with me, film it, and then sell the tape is THAT legal, or is it prostitution?

If so, why?

I'm really trying to understand things.

Easy E wrote:So, as a follow-up.

If I pay someone to have sex with me, film it, and then sell the tape is THAT legal, or is it prostitution?

If so, why?

I'm really trying to understand things.

The tape you are making is speech, so the production of said tape is protected.

It's dumb, but it's constitutionally consistent. Since prostitution is commerce and not distributed as speech, it's not protected the same way. Sex itself is protected, but sex for MONEY is not. The money part is what allows it to be regulated by a state.

The reason this happened is because BOTH were illegal until the middle of the 20th century and people fought to get porn legalized using a successful first amendment argument. Prostitution hasn't been in many cases yet, so no ground has been gained. It's POSSIBLE that one could craft an argument that it's free assembly or something, but the money changing hands makes it commerce so it would be a hard case.

The best play to get both legalized would just be to lobby the states to change the law. I would bet money that it's legal everywhere within the next 100 or so years.

successful topic is successful...

However... in other news... I'm surprised Rented Tritium and I agree on a topic... ah well i guess there is one thing everyone can agree on... PORN

frgsinwntr wrote:successful topic is successful...

However... in other news... I'm surprised Rented Tritium and I agree on a topic... ah well i guess there is one thing everyone can agree on... PORN

I think you'll find that I'm actually a bleeding heart liberal when it isn't an argument about police authority.

You can respect a person who's involved in porn, and respect their right to their own choices, while still being disappointed in that choice and feeling sad for them.

For most of us, sex is a private matter we share with the person or people we love and are close to. Sometimes it's something we do more casually, for pleasure and relief of stress, and/or while looking for love and companionship. When you take this personal thing and make it a job, that at least looks like something of a sacrifice. The person has commodified their own intimacy and perhaps adulturated their exaltation and the physical expression of passion they are able to share with the person or people they care about. This can have negative consequences for their private sex life.

Now, the point which I believe Tritium is on, is that we need to be careful not to assume that all sex workers are damaged or in need of pity. Many of these folks make these choices of their own free will, and are still able to maintain functional and joyful personal relationships.

On the other hand, what he and his friends probably need to admit is that there are a lot of damaged folks in these industries too. People whose own personal lives and sexual health are negatively impacted by commodifying their bodies and sexual expression. And this is why a lot of us tend to react negatively- because we would not personally want to do that, and because we have known people who seemed to harm themselves by misuse of their own sexuality. It is an essentially empathic gesture to pity someone in porn. We should, however, still respect them as a human being and allow for the possibility that they have made the choices they wanted to and have kept their personal life and feelings intact and functional. We haven't walked a mile in their shoes, and can't really judge.

Mannahnin wrote:When you take this personal thing and make it a job, that at least looks like something of a sacrifice.

Not buying it.

I have a friend who loves driving cars for a lot of reasons. I don't pity him or feel sad for him when he becomes a professional racecar driver.

That argument utterly falls apart when you stop assuming that sex is magical symbolism.

On the other hand, what he and his friends probably need to admit is that there are a lot of damaged folks in these industries too

And I never said otherwise.

However there are damaged folks in LITERALLY EVERY INDUSTRY, so it's irrelevant.

There are people in every industry for the right reasons, there are people in every industry for the wrong reasons. There is nothing special about porn as an industry.

Rented Tritium wrote:
That argument utterly falls apart when you stop assuming that sex is magical symbolism.

Not really. You're substituting logical necessity for an argument from reason. Sex does not necessarily have to possess a necessary property of "magical symbolism" to be held as a magical symbol by large chunks of the population, who will thus find something unseemly about the pornographic industry given that it strips this symbolism away. Noting this unseemly reputation, and subsequently feeling sorry for people who have either been forced into porn by circumstance, or freely chosen it as a career doesn't necessarily relate to pornography itself, but its place in the society in which it is being produced.

Rented Tritium wrote:
However there are damaged folks in LITERALLY EVERY INDUSTRY, so it's irrelevant.

Well, no not really. If the pornographic industry contains a higher percentage of damaged individuals, especially individuals damaged by their participation in pornography, then it absolutely is relevant. Hell, the pornographic industry itself recognized, and worked to address it, following all the incredibly shady goings-on from the early days of the medium when there was even less of a distinction between a porn star and a prostitute/gigolo.

Rented Tritium wrote:
There is nothing special about porn as an industry.

That's nonsense. Very few other industries tap into, and work to leverage, a human desire so basic as sexuality. Advertising may use sex to sell, but pornography is the only legitimate industry that literally sells sex. Then figure in that pornography had close ties to the mob only 3-4 decades ago (as in, it was essentially an arm of organized crime), and you have a nice little niche for yourself in terms of industry character.

Lets get down to brass tacks here. There really isn't a debate going on here that's on topic surely?

I mean, blokes are arguing about porn and such, not about the fact that this bird is actually corrupting kids, because quite fething clearly she isn't. She is teaching them about reading. If the teacher at my nephews school has only EVER talked about math since she took the job, who cares if she happened to like getting ploughed on video beforehand? Its not even a sensible criticism whichever way you slice it. She was in porn, now she isnt. End of discussion surely?

Well, unless she is reading them books about felching whilst wearing a gimp suit, and mid lesson two men dressed as plumbers enter the classroom and jam the contents of their tool bag into her rear aperture.

Then she IS corrupting kids.

And that's very bad.

dogma wrote:

Rented Tritium wrote:
That argument utterly falls apart when you stop assuming that sex is magical symbolism.

Not really. You're substituting logical necessity for an argument from reason. Sex does not necessarily have to possess a necessary property of "magical symbolism" to be held as a magical symbol by large chunks of the population, who will thus find something unseemly about the pornographic industry given that it strips this symbolism away. Noting this unseemly reputation, and subsequently feeling sorry for people who have either been forced into porn by circumstance, or freely chosen it as a career doesn't necessarily relate to pornography itself, but its place in the society in which it is being produced.

Feeling shame for people for what they do is something that happens inside YOU, not them. What YOU feel about people is YOUR baggage. They shouldn't have to deal with your baggage.

Rented Tritium wrote:
However there are damaged folks in LITERALLY EVERY INDUSTRY, so it's irrelevant.

Well, no not really. If the pornographic industry contains a higher percentage of damaged individuals, especially individuals damaged by their participation in pornography, then it absolutely is relevant. Hell, the pornographic industry itself recognized, and worked to address it, following all the incredibly shady goings-on from the early days of the medium when there was even less of a distinction between a porn star and a prostitute/gigolo.

And again, feeling shame for an individual person because of the people in their industry or because you know that other people will feel shame is nonsense. Stop applying YOUR baggage and feelings about an industry to other people's lives.

Rented Tritium wrote:
There is nothing special about porn as an industry.

That's nonsense. Very few other industries tap into, and work to leverage, a human desire so basic as sexuality.

Oh my ribs, I am laughing too hard, ow ow ow

Advertising may use sex to sell, but pornography is the only legitimate industry that literally sells sex.

That's a really fuzzy line you've got there. They literally sell images of sex. Some of them are real, some are simulated, some are animated. Even the real penetration isn't unique to porn considering Caligula and numerous french films. What you are arguing here applies to several non-porn industries.

Then figure in that pornography had close ties to the mob only 3-4 decades ago (as in, it was essentially an arm of organized crime), and you have a nice little niche for yourself in terms of industry character.

So did alcohol. If we banned stuffed animals, the mob would have ties to them too. Any time you ban something, the mob fills the gaps. That says more about how dumb we are for banning something than it says about the stuff itself.

And it says a lot about you that you'd bring up 40 year old mob ties to attack a vice.

Thansk for the info on commerce vs. speech.

Also, everyone knows reading to kids is a dumb idea. Then they might...like...form opinions and learn stuff you don't want them to learn.

I'd love it if Sasha Grey read to me...

I was about to make a comment about her reading me a bedtime story but then Google images reminded me that I was thinking Tori Black, not Sasha Grey and Sasha has tastes I'm not sure I'm good to go for.