For those concerned with Free Speech (or Porn), it is time to get active.

About 10 years ago I was reading an article by Katha Pollitt (a feminist columnist who writes for The Nation). In that article she cited a statistic (with no reference, since it was an opinion column) that said about one fourth of pornographic video tapes (the main source of porn in those days) were rented by women. And she pointed out that this did not include women who made their boy-friends rent the tape because they were too embarrassed themselves to do so.Now, I have no way of verifying the accuracy of this long ago statistic (just as I have no way of verifying Ms. Lovelace's claims), but it would be interesting if someone has some actual statistics on what women think about pornography.

I said "maybe." I don't know for sure. Let a woman answer this question.

Great that's my second question - how about you answer the first?

I didn't see that clip, but have heard about a couple porn stars (m and f) who are trying to catch some notoriety by being all in your face as Republicans. The girl even called Rove "sexy", and that at a Rep dinner she was hoping to convince Bush that while he might dislike homosexuality "a little girl on girl action is okay once in a while."Could people such as this perhaps be less than all there, or maybe even on drugs? Why would that not surprise me. 1) Given the massive nature of the porn "industry" and the tiny nature of Hollywood, I'd say there's less in porn.2) What is the prevalance of drug addiction in Los Angeles as opposed to the rest of the nation? If it is higher does that suggest something should be done to end LA, or rather that there might be a third issue at work?This is really poor reasoning. Even if your suspicion were correct, it seems rather obvious that it is not an inherent relationship and might be explained by other factors which combine with the reality that porn is not one of the highest held careers in the nation... outside of those that like porn that is.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Master/slave implications. Only hardcore heterosexual is what I am talking about.

Holmes - How does this affect the rights of European producers to import their material for american consumption - will they have to comply with regulations on fonts etc?(BTW I have a great porn regulation story I'll tell you when I get back from dinner).

Well that sure is convenient. For sake of argument then we'll remove gay porn.There are women who still make hetero porn, as well as men who do not focus on degradation. What exactly counts as "hardcore"?If your definition of hardcore is that it involves degradation (which I freely admit is one valid def) then your comment about HARDCORE porn is true but only focuses on one small segment of the porn industry in total.If your definition of hardcore is sexually explicit (which is also valid) then you are completely wrong.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Can you define for us what is in a "hardcore Hetrosexual" film for us?What if the man is strapped to the bed and the woman goes to work on him with a sex toy? is that still hetrosexual? who's the master and the slave in that situation?

It has been stated quite clearly by the AG that nonUS producers will have to comply with both full recordkeeping and labelling requirements if they are going to sell products within the US.The quote was something along the lines that if they expect to do business they will have to do so in compliance with all US laws just like any other business.I would think that this, more than anything else, should be worrying US citizens. The US is now going to be closing off adult communication between US and the rest of teh world. It is as ridiculous as when more strict nations cut of communication with the US for moral reasons, and the US laughs.Like I said this will even hit regular filmmakers who happen to include graphic sexuality, but are not making sexual entertainment. Many first world nations outside the US and Britain do this quite regularly.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

My ex-girlfriend did a sociology paper on this a few years ago. Long story short - most young women she spoke with were porn-positive. It was a great paper, and made some interesting points. Her tutor rejected the paper on the grounds that 'no women like pornography, since it degrades and objectifies them" (the tutor was a woman).So yeah, I think the younger generation, who have grown up with very easy access to porn (indeed, anyone whos had an email address in the last 10 years will attest to it being more than easy), have realized that porn isn't a dirty secretive thing that men in trench coats watch before beating up their wife.It isn't universal of course, but its a growing trend. Unfortunately, this is all purely anecdotal. However, I've spoken openly with all of my female friends regarding pornography and they are either pro-porn or neutral-porn. I have not spoken face to face with anyone who thought pornography was a negative thing (plenty have thought it was boring or silly, but I rank that as neutral).

quote:

---

Master/slave implications.

---

Perhaps I need to do more *ahem* research on this. Unfortunately, what little porn I have seen since my post-adolescent porn days has been a few short clips and a few still pictures -- very little suggestive of a master/slave relationship, but perhaps I need to see the entire context.But certainly the films I saw in their entirety -- back in the bad old Linda Loveless days, incidently -- I saw no overt master/slave relationships. Women were as likely to be initiators as men, and I remember very little in the way of dominant/submissive relationships in the sexual acts. But perhaps this is a case of selective memory.I am not disputing the notion that the pornography at that time, or even today, is degrading -- other people here seem to know more about that than I. I am just curious as to what makes some porn degrading, and whether these features are as prevalent as is being implied.

That's interesting. Most of the women I discussed this with (including a now ex-girlfriend and my sister) are quite porn-negative.On the other hand, back in my high school and college days, I rarely saw a porn film where the audience did not include women brought by their boy friends.

I know I'm jumping in a bit late. You guys seem to be on here 24 hr a day. Anyway...

quote:

---

It seems to be the dominant view of this thread -- the more sexual freedom the better.
  —Faith

---

No, this is not true. You are accusing those who disagree with you of supporting the opposite side. The problem is things are not always white and black.For example, everyone who has ever had a kid knows that right around the ages of 2-6 they often don't want to eat that much. Some people say that the best way to approach this is to force feed their children, literally shoving food down their throats. I happen to disagree with that (I do not have any of my own but I have been babysitting for many years, sometimes up to 4 little buggers at a time). I believe that the best way to approach it is to keep encouraging them to eat. Present food whenever possible and try to make it fun for them. Do anything other than making eating a nightmare for them.When I voice my opinion, you accuse me of wanting to starve my children. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I support the opposite view!Going back to porn, this thread is about the freedom of speech and expression. It really sounds like you are accusing the rest of us of supporting force prostitution, rape, and other unpleasant sex acts. You are misrepresenting our arguments.By the way, do you believe in force-feeding your children when they don't want to eat or do you believe in starving them to death?

quote:

---

master/slave relationship
  —Chiroptera

---

Just watch gay porn and you can avoid the master/slave thing completely.

As a matter of fact, some defense attorneys of murderers have used the "murder gene" defense for their clients. Perhaps we should start banning genes or sterilize people for having such family backgrounds?