Darkness
Psychoanalyst/Marxist
I agree with that actually.
It is common sense, really. I am a senior in college, and honestly, male and female 18-year-olds are definitely not mature enough to work in pornography.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I agree with that actually.
Then we might as well drive the legal age for gambling, smoking, alcohol, voting and joining the service to 25 as well, Mustn't forget driving, either. Can't drive until your 25.
There is a very big difference between a fight , with two consenting adults, and randomly harming someone. It is pretty clear to me.
rakhel's answer was simply perfect so i will quote her:
People shouldn't have to be forced to use the seatbelt if they don't want it as long as they are putting ONLY their lives in danger. The fact is, however, there is no good reason to don't use a seatbelt.
Darkness said:So, we should be able to have gladiator fights to the death if the participants are consenting adults.
Darkness said:And this is the crux of the issues and why I reject liberal theory. I believe it is in the full right of the society, through a democratic process, to compel people to wear seatbelts, even if it conflicts with their natural liberty. It always comes back to seatbelts, my political theory professor always says.
Aha, this could make up for an even more interesting topic than the whole pornography thing. My answer is yes. Nevertheless, the fact is that gladiator matches are quite devastating. Comparing them to pornography is a real joke. You are comparing a death match to sex.
I don't see a good reason to do so. Would you care to explain why do you think so?
Darkness said:I am not saying that the two are analogous. I am merely presenting the limits of adult consent.
Darkness said:It is simple really. Living life (i.e. not dying) makes us more free, than our ability to be stupid ever could. Think about it this way. It is foolish to say that living in anarchy is the freest state we could ever experience. You are under constant threat of violence and death. We need a society/government to create and authority with power to restrict our anarchistic freedoms, so that we can experience true freedom; what the Greeks called eudaimonia, or human flourishing.
Darkness said:You are comparing apples to oranges. Drinking is done in private by those under-aged, so it is doubtful raising the age floor for alcohol consumption will do anything to deter consumption. By its very nature, the porn industry functions out in the open. If made illegal, we should be able to eliminate a vast majority of the industry. Who is going to hold an underground porn conference?
Let me ask you a question. Should two consenting adults be able to fight to the death?
You are utilising a double-standard. Yes, victims may have become complacent in their relationship, but according to your standard, as long as the participant is a consenting adult, shouldn't he or she be free to make that choice? There are plenty of other men/women out there to go have a relationship with. You see, in the abusive scenario you consider psychological reasons, but when it comes to pornography you throw those out the window. Maybe a man in pornography is in it for self-esteem issues. Maybe a woman is involved doing it, because she doesn't know feel any worth in herself besides her body image in an overly sexualised culture. A typical scenario is the heterosexual male who performs in gay porn, because it pays more.
I have no problem with you filming yourself having sex and putting it on the internet. That is fine. I am merely concerned with the wage-labour monetary dimension to it.
I am not under the illusion we could ban pornography-for-profit any time soon in the United States, but how about a compromise. We keep pornography legal, but set the age floor for participation at 25. The pornography preys on young people who are still not cognitively and emotionally developed. Taking those victims out of the equation would be a step in the right direction.
I doubt it too. Especially now that unlike porn from the past where you had to go to a theater to watch it (and be labeled a pervert or skank) today the internet allows anyone to view it as long as you have it.I completely agree with this as well but there is no way this would ever happen. I am taking a guess here but isn't porn with younger people more popular? If it is, this just helps the adult film industry make more money. They aren't going to get rid of that. It's the same thing with cigarettes. They don't care if they are bad for you. They just want the money.
If you can't see 18 year old hotties in porn, what's the point?
wow.
I hardly know what to say to that.
How old is your wife?
Do you enjoy looking at her?
I really DON'T like watching teenage girls/young women
engaging in sexual activity.
My own daughter is 18.
It may be more of a store policy but it could vary from state to state.Just to clarify, I didn't mean that 18 year old shouldn't be legally allowed to WATCH porn. :no:
I was referring to 18, 19, 20 year olds being filmed IN porn movies, for profit.
Come to think of it, the sex shop around here that I occasionally visit
does not even let anyone in under the age of 21. ???
Is that a law?
And i said "yes" to your question so unless you want to expand on that your argument failed.
What? Obviously each individual right should be respected to the point it doesn't interfere with another individual's right. We do need a government to enforce this, however we do not need a government to restrict our individual rights that have nothing to do with other people. Got it?
You are just seeing the two extremes: government controlling our individual rights completely and the anarchy. You simply ignore/forget there is a whole lot between those two.
First of all, you addressed just the part that you felt convenient in her statement, the drinking. What about the others? Driving, gambling, voting and joining the service can not be rebutted by your reply.
Second, if that is your argument against drinking, then how about not having an age floor for drinking? According to your own argument, the current law is not making any difference, so why stick to it, right? Oh, but if it does make a difference then there would be a point in raising the age floor to 25 years old.
The problem with your view, like Dworkin-Mackinnon, is that you are.comparing poenography with physical abuse. You tell others you are.comparing apples to oranges yet you are doing it yourself. Should two consenting adults fight to the death?
Apparently you don't watch boxing or MMA.
Apparently sexes perceive pornography differently and as you have shown, pornography to you is "physical harm" yet, you haven't shown any psychological research to provide validity. I am a researcher and I look at peer reviewed articles daily so if you can provide evidence I would appreciate it.
Most people on RF that is familiar with pornography would not equate porn with spousal or sexual abuse. When I said women (or men) become complacent in abusive relationships I am referring to the psychological instability of that relationship because its constant emotional stress which the victim feels they have little option of escape. A porn star is not only financially compensated but has the choice of not performing sexual acts. The only way a pot star becomes complacent, is the constant financial success. Sure, you have some addicted to the lifestyle but I have a hard time making correlations between domestic violence and porn.