What Is Your Stance On Porn?

[LQC]

To me porn is like horror movies and video games. I know a lot of people that like them, but I have no interest in any of them.

I just wish those that like porn would realize that like horror movies and video games there's very little in it that mirrors real life.

That depends on what kind of porn it is.

 

[kronos]

I mean, yeah, “studio porn” can be really empty and boring. For example, look at Sean Cody from before, and then after, he sold it. After it was bought and became “studio” porn, the videos just became so empty and superficial. Me? I gravitate to more everyday amateur guys/sites that use more amateur type guys off the streets and who respond to ads, rather than the empty mannequins in “Studio Porn”. The only time “studio” porn works for me is when it’s from very minor (usually) lower budget “studios” that are specializing in niche fetishes or fantasies (because whatever niche or fantasy it is I have an interest in), but even then, sometimes they do it really badly.

Porn actors in that kind of porn are still human beings so I think calling them empty mannequins is dehumanizing and trash, but I get what you're saying. For me I think the biggest issue is most of that stuff, stuff like Bang Bros, etc is that it's made to appeal to an audience that isn't me. I think a lot of it is parasocial/performative and too far removed from reality for me to get into, but a lot of people love to see sex portrayed that way, so to each their own.

 

[kronos]

Clarification: too far removed from reality = fetishized and exaggerated portrayals of something that could be more sex positive/natural. Again, no shade to anyone this applies to - the main issue imho is that a lot of porn appeals to a sex negative male gaze because that's what usually sells.

 

[techpump]

I dislike it. All chatroom stuff I'm way not into anymore when I was a daily user for years. I had to quit it, had to cut it off. I didn't spend a lot of money, maybe $10-20 here and there, but it was the overload of the same thing that bothered me. I've been off porn a little over 9 weeks now and its very cool. I have looked at some pictures here and there but haven't looked at videos in 9 weeks. Watch "Pornocracy" if you want to really see what the online porn industry is all about. Once I saw that I was certainly done with it!

 

[LQC]

Porn actors in that kind of porn are still human beings so I think calling them empty mannequins is dehumanizing and trash, but I get what you're saying. For me I think the biggest issue is most of that stuff, stuff like Bang Bros, etc is that it's made to appeal to an audience that isn't me. I think a lot of it is parasocial/performative and too far removed from reality for me to get into, but a lot of people love to see sex portrayed that way, so to each their own.

I called them empty mannequins, because of the generic sameness of the performers, and because the sex is boring. Jesus! Don’t take things so literally!

 

[LQC]

Clarification: too far removed from reality = fetishized and exaggerated portrayals of something that could be more sex positive/natural. Again, no shade to anyone this applies to - the main issue imho is that a lot of porn appeals to a sex negative male gaze because that's what usually sells.

Well wait, what the hell is “sex negative” about it?

 

[Lover man]

It can be enjoyable.

 

[e_dog1996]

I believe porn is such an antiquated word now. I associate it with traditional studio style porn, which is still fun to watch. I however prefer real amateur style videos and getting off to cam models, Twitter, and only fans material.

 

[LQC]

A lot of porn also appeals to a sex negative female gaze also.

let’s not turn this into a gender negative or stereotyping discussion.

What the fuck is this “sex negative” crap in terms of porn?

 

[bbnc44]

I do watch it some I do enjoy it from time to time .

Yea me too..

 

[LQC]

I believe porn is such an antiquated word now. I associate it with traditional studio style porn, which is still fun to watch. I however prefer real amateur style videos and getting off to cam models, Twitter, and only fans material.

I do believe the definition of pornography hasn’t changed.

Pornography (pɔːˈnɒɡrəfɪ)
1. writings, pictures, films, etc, designed to stimulate sexual excitement
2. the production of such material

Sometimes (informal) shortened to: porn, porno
Word Origin
C19: from Greek pornographos writing of harlots, from pornē a harlot + graphein to write

 

[bbnc44]

I like it..porn pics and videos.. milfs.. is that good.?

 

[Mount Phalic]

It’s a progressive term used by feminists, pretty much meaning “women are just objects through a mans eye”.

I would argue that point

Feminists will try to destroy anything men like.

 

[Mount Phalic]

What the fuck is this “sex negative” crap in terms of porn?

It's anti-male bull shit, pure and simple.

 

[Mount Phalic]

read further up the page it will make sense

I see it now. Thanks.

 

[LQC]

It’s a progressive term used by feminists, pretty much meaning “women are just objects through a mans eye”.

I would argue that point

Well, it is true that heterosexual porn is made exclusively for what’s known as the “male gaze” - that is, the male point of view. Proof of this can be seen in the way that “bisexual porn” is marketed. A MMF porn where the two males have sexual contact is marketed as “Bisexual”, whereas FFM porn, where the two females have sexual contact is marketed as standard “Straight” porn. Nevertheless, there is nothing “sex negative” about it. The porn is made for a specific viewer, and it’s all about sex, and nothing but sex. Porn doesn’t exist to be didactic; it exists for one reason only: for people, men in particular, to get off to. That’s it. Nothing more. It’s doing it’s job.

 

[Mount Phalic]

Well, it is true that heterosexual porn is made exclusively for what’s known as the “male gaze” - that is, the male point of view. Proof of this can be seen in the way that “bisexual porn” is marketed. A MMF porn where the two males have sexual contact is marketed as “Bisexual”, whereas FFM porn, where the two females have sexual contact is marketed as standard “Straight” porn. Nevertheless, there is nothing “sex negative” about it. The porn is made for a specific viewer, and it’s all about sex, and nothing but sex. Porn doesn’t exist to be didactic; it exists for one reason only: for people, men in particular, to get off to. That’s it. Nothing more. It’s doing it’s job.

Yes, I agree 100%.

 

[LQC]

Feminists will try to destroy anything men like.

Feminists want to be men. Until such point as it’s no longer convenient for them. Then they will not hesitate to backtrack into the “but I’m a woman” stance.

 

[Mount Phalic]

It’s right up there with the term “toxic masculinity’’.

Exactly. Anything to trash men and make them less than human.

 

[farmhand]

Porn has been around since before "mechanical" printing (Egyptian hieroglyphics). Graduate school professor Helmut Lehmann-Haupt posited that Gutenberg likely did NOT print the Bible first, but such an important thing would have been preceded by lesser things, AND things earning money, as naughty (i.e., pornographic) playing cards. [https://monumentsmenfoundation.org/lehmann-haupt-hellmut-emil] Just as early use of photography was porn/nude (simply difficult to find/not so much survived), and 8mm film quickly became porn available through the mail, then BetaMax or moreso VHS porn through the mail, and even before those formats, 1-inch tape as Bob Crane of Hogan's Heroes is known to have dabbled in 1-inch videotape porn ["Autofocus" https://imdb.com/title/tt0298744/ ] -- THEN came Internet with porn quickly traded via JPGs or GIF images, and NOW full video !