Why do some people keep reinforcing that porn is not bad?

i am also a vegan but how could being vegan help the environment?

 

Maybe it's a bad translation, sorry. I mean to prevent more climate change and other things like this (at least a little bit).

 

You should add a "t" at the end of your username. Can you demonstrate that porn is objectively bad?

 

I guess we can't fight over this now, can we?
please understand that people have their opinions, and there is no reason to defy someone else's opinion just because it collides with yours.
I think porn is the baddest thing there is, FellatiousD does not. what can be done here? opinions are what differentiate people, after all!

 

There is plenty that can be done. We can have a dialogue and use reason to eliminate bad arguments, which is what I am attempting to do, for better or worse.

 

Personally I get twitchy when people start talking about sending people to camps in order to force beliefs and social values on one another.

I don't think pornography in and of itself is inherently bad. Just as I don't believe coffee is bad, even though there are a lot of people in the world who are addicted to caffeine. I DO think the porn industry is sick and needs reform. I think addiction needs social understanding and support.. But I think it's simplistic to say that pornography is bad just because it can be addictive. Anything can be addictive if taken or used to an unhealthy degree

 

I think people say porn is bad because of the risks outweigh the benefits (if there are any). In my expirence I was raised in a negative environment and to be frank porn saved me by numbing me from the emotional pain, but even then its not something I would say is positive. Though it did help me get through my childhood it also took away somethings It blinded me from other solutions that would have had a more positive affect. The Risk of porn far outweigh any benefits you can get from it, I don't see how anyone can compare it to coffee which yes you could get addicted to, but coffee likely won't turn you into a social degenerate and make you sexually inept.

 

It sounds like porn became an escape and a coping mechanism during your childhood, which while not healthy, allowed you to get through it until you could start learning better coping strategies as an adult. I'm glad you made it this far to recognize both how it served you and how it's no longer helping you.

Do I believe that the risk outweighs the benefits? There are a lot of people who aren't addicted to porn. Even if I am an addict, I don't consider myself a "social degenerate" I'm a human being with a problem. I'm not out there raping babies or flashing people in movie theaters. So, no. Porn didn't turn me into anything but a human being who needs structure, help and compassion - just as an alcoholic or any other kind of addict does.

I think there ARE healthy ways to use porn. There are people who are ashamed of their sexuality and sexual preferences and porn can be a way for them to realize that they aren't alone. There are couples who use it together for inspiration and excitement. Do I believe that there are better ways? Absolutely. But instead of saying "porn is evil" (because it's not going away. Sex sells.) it would be a better use of our energy if we were to educate people about the risks of addiction, how to identify addiction, how to make healthy intimate connections with other humans instead of using porn as a substitute. Sexual revolution vs sexual suppression.

Now, if we want to say that the porn industry as it currently exists is evil; exploiting human beings, enabling human trafficking, and giving unhealthy expectations to younger generations about sex... I'm totally with you. It absolutely needs reform.

And I can totally compare coffee and porn. Caffeine addiction can lead to organ failure. My housemate's father was just told he needs to stop drinking caffeine if he wants to keep his kidneys. At least porn and erotica won't directly kill me.

 

"Gryft"? The only thing I could find is that it's the Frisian word for "pit". Not sure what to make of that.

This is where we're at folks. We're being asked to "demonstrate" that observing strangers in copulation might be bad.
To preempt your objection; no, the fact that they agreed to being watched does not make doing so any less pathological.

Next stop: "do you have a study to support your claim that molesting children is wrong?".

 

Pathological: extreme in a way that is not normal or that shows an illness or mental problem. medical : relating to or caused by disease. technical : of or relating to the study of disease (Merriam-Webster).

Based on the definition, the normal and measured consensual observation of other adults having consensual sex isn't pathological, if it doesn't interfere in the health or well-being of the individuals involved. Voyeurism isn't a pathological disease or mental health problem.

It becomes a disease when the person involved is unable to function in a way that is healthy. In the case of NoFap: addiction, sexual dysfunction, and/or inability to connect in healthy, intimate, and sexual ways with a chosen partner or partners.

So while there may be social mores and religious ideologies about sex, pornography, or voyeurism - if it doesn't interfere with someone's ability to function in a healthy way or cross ethical lines regarding consent... It isn't pathological and inherently "bad" or "evil".

 

You don't have to answer the question, it just makes you intellectually dishonest. If you want to dodge, that's fine.

 

Sure. And it's crucial (on this site at least, unfortunately) to point out that not everyone who engages in porn exhibits these maladies. It looks like we're in agreement here.

 

Please tell me this is sarcasm.

I didn't dodge anything. I'll spell it out for you again - watching other people fuck is creepy and pathetic.

 

No. No sarcasm. Watching porn isn't considered abnormal. Watching 20 minutes a week is considered "recreational" and not seen as unhealthy. Watching 110+ minutes per week is considered compulsive (where we addicts live). Watching people without consent (peeping Tom) is both pathological and unethical.

That's a value judgment, an opinion. You're entitled to it, but it's not an objective evaluation as to whether it's pathological or unhealthy.

 

Oh I'm sure it's considered normal by some just as cutting your dink and balls off and proclaiming yourself a woman. Public opinion has gone completely mad.

Sex is a manifestation of a bond that is exclusive to the parties involved. The pitiful salivating loser who snoops on it has accepted the role of a defeated submissive dog. That's not who you are and not who you should be!

 

Of course it's a value judgment. Not sure whether it's just an opinion though. And unobjective it definitively is not. Values and ideals can be objective - a concept that is hard to accept that after nonstop relativizationist brainwashing, I know.

 

If you want to get down to the nuts and bolts of it, sex at its base function is the act of procreation. The male goes off and spreads his half of the genetic code, the female combines it with her half of the genetic code and voila! New combination of both genetic material is born!

This provides opportunities for genetic diversity, mutation, evolution, genetic drift and all sorts of cool (or uncool) results. The more sex, the more likely to procreate. The more variety, the more genetic diversity.

That's sex, pure and simple.

Socially, however, it's different depending on the society's values and mores. Modern day marriage was shaped around inheritance laws, which required monogamy and exclusively. If someone in the 12th century didn't care about whether their child inherited vs some other man's child, they probably wouldn't care whether or not the relationship was sexually monogamous.

Since sex is the biological imperative and relationships are the emotional manifestation of the biological imperative, I'd say that thankfully for everyone who can't or doesn't have children, the bond between two people is an emotional one vs a sexual one. Sex is just one way that bond is regularly nurtured and renewed.

Otherwise people would only stay with one another for the purpose of creating and raising children... and that would be sad for anyone wanting romance, love and physical intimacy outside of procreation.

 

Let's break this down because you bring up the idea of revisionist brainwashing. Since I don't want to risk misunderstanding or being brainwashed I'm going to use objective definitions in order to make sure I understand the terms we're both using. Fair enough?

Opinion: 1) a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge. 2) the beliefs or views of a large number or majority of people about a particular thing. 3) an estimation of the quality or worth of someone or something.

We are agreed that you believe watching others have sex is creepy and pathetic. We agree it is a value judgment and it is unobjective. Therefore it is a belief, based on your personal values and ideals, correct?

Objective: 1) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts. 2) not dependent on the mind for existence; actual.

Gravity exists. It doesn't require me to believe it exists for my feet to stay on the floor. It is not an ideal about what gravity is, it does not care what I think about gravity. It doesn't even need humanity to exist for it to function.

Based on the dictionary definitions, values and ideals require personal opinions and feelings therefore cannot be objective. Something is inherently good or bad, wrong or right for it to be a value or ideal. Values and ideals can be built on objective data, but they aren't always.

My values and ideals assert that whether or it's objective, that it's great for you to stand for no pornography, voyeurism, or sex shared outside your monogamous, romantic and intimate diad.

But I can't agree with you that it is an objective fact or that it works the same way for everyone; because it isn't that way for everyone unless there is measurable, unbiased, observational proof.

It could totally change and I could be absolutely wrong. I'm cool with that. But creepy, pathetic and wrong are value judgments and not objective facts about pornography and whether it is inherently harmful or pathological to everyone and not just the people on this site.

 

@Stenacity you're putting way too much effort into this

You've gone off a tangent talking about monogamy, love, etc. While those are also interesting topics they're not what I was talking about.

All I'm asserting is that stepping into someone else's sex life is

1. profane, not well-mannered
2. self-degrading, self-humiliating

The theory of gravity is just a model of reality (that is likely incorrect).

1+1=2 is a custom. There is no reason to call the operation of adding '+' or the result of adding 1 to 1 '2'. The concept of 1 or a number in general is also made up.

In a sense, every single statement or claim you can make is 'just an opinion'.

 

When you are using someone for sex aren't you "stepping" into their sex life.
If i understand correctly your argument against porn is that you are watching other people have sex and being turned on by it, so you have nothing with say a guy recording himself alone or with another and then beating off on it later? or just being turned on by what he see in say a mirror?
And this here has nothing to do with anything but what do you think of strip-tease?