Morality standpoints of pornography

Started by Muffin™ December 11th, 2010 6:13 PM
  • 2218 views
  • 39 replies

Kura

twitter.com/puccarts

Age 33
Female
London, UK (orig. Toronto, Canada)
Seen August 30th, 2021
Posted August 24th, 2021
10,993 posts
18.7 Years
I find this to be an interesting topic when you think about it in deeper means. Kinda like.. well what is it that attracts people to watching sexual relations with others? And how does an avid porn watcher really differentiate themselves from Voyeurism (which is technically a mental disorder) or how much watching would merit an addiction.
For those who don't know, voyeurism is a disorder where people get sexual gratification from seeing a naked body or sexual acts. This, though, becomes criminal when the offender begins to act more like a "peeping tom" than a porn watcher.. but they are closely connected in a way.

I also find it to be interesting on a moral standpoint. Some people find porn outright wrong or disgusting, and others find it to be a very natural thing. I find this interesting in the fact that it probably relates to how people regard the sexual act OR if they're mature enough to really understand different meanings of sexual love. For example, perhaps one person thinks watching porn is wrong because they believe it's an intimate moment shared with two people- and to them, sex is a private affair- which therefore makes them uncomfortable watching. With other people, they might be very open to the affair and find it easy to discuss it with others. I guess all people treat it differently, but usually it SHOULD be treated in a mature manner to everyone because people can be very touchy over the subject, and they should be respectful.

That's basically my thoughts on pornography. I don't think it's necessarily wrong.. but when it starts to become an addiction, then that's a bad thing. Animals and children is a whole other matter, though, and is, of course, illegal in most countries.
~Yuugiou Fan~
~Kamen Rider Fan~
♡(´・ω・`)LOVE! ☆

FreakyLocz14

Conservative Patriot

Male
Seen August 29th, 2018
Posted August 28th, 2018
3,497 posts
14 Years
I don't find pornography to be immoral. I know some people do find it immoral, but I believe people should be allowed to do whatever they wish in the privacy of their own homes along as all parties viewing such material are consenting and of legal age. I don't even find animated CP or adults acting as children to be wrong or immoral, since no actual children are being exploited through it.
Age 32
Male
Lyonesse
Seen August 15th, 2011
Posted March 15th, 2011
191 posts
14.4 Years
I never did understand why the legal sex age was 16 but the age for porn was 18...

I don't think it's immoral; as long as there are people doing something someone else is going to want to watch, so it's just a particular taste really. Except stuff like child porn is wrong.
I've got a plan so cunning you could brush your teeth with it.

arts

Rich Boy Rob

"Fezzes are cool." The Doctor

Age 29
Male
Seen March 15th, 2016
Posted August 15th, 2015
1,051 posts
14.9 Years
I don't think there's anything really wrong with porn. Most people who think it's morally wrong think so because it's apparently degrading to women, but while that may be true in some cases, women are usually the "star of the show" and in the driving seat as it were.
As long as it's between two consenting adults it's fine in my opinion.

I never did understand why the legal sex age was 16 but the age for porn was 18...
Yeah, I never got that either. I think it was Jimmy Carr who did a joke about that, something along the lines of "Okay, when you're 16 you can have sex, but you aren't allowed to watch it for another 2 years, so make sure not to look down". I think they should be both at 16 in my opinion. Mind you, most people start watching when they are only 14 or so anyway, so that renders my point kinda moot.
In my pants!

Rich Boy Rob

"Fezzes are cool." The Doctor

Age 29
Male
Seen March 15th, 2016
Posted August 15th, 2015
1,051 posts
14.9 Years
I think it is morally bad because it funds organized crime. Lots of women are forced into being in pornography by criminals.
I think you may have got pornography confused with prostitution there :\
In my pants!

Jolene

Your huckleberry friend

Age 27
Female
Seen September 25th, 2012
Posted September 25th, 2012
1,287 posts
13.8 Years
I think you may have got pornography confused with prostitution there :\
You are wrong organized crime is also involved in pornography.

What light through yonder window breaks?
It is the East, and Joliet is the sun!

Zeffy

g'day

Male
Seen December 1st, 2022
Posted January 30th, 2021
6,395 posts
14.1 Years
You are wrong organized crime is also involved in pornography.
And you do know that porn is legal in some countries, one of them being the United States.

And porn isn't immoral, as long as those involved accepts what they do.

Corvus of the Black Night

Wild Duck Pokémon

Age 30
Non-binary
With the Birds
Seen January 9th, 2015
Posted January 9th, 2015
3,416 posts
14.3 Years
I find porn to be a form of art as any other sort of imagery intended to invoke certain emotions. I personally don't like porn, but it's the same reason why some people don't like art with people with animal faces - it's just not my thing.

I don't really approve of child porn because of the fact that the child is a) not asked for consent and b) could be psychologically hurt by this lack of consent when they find out about it later.

I think it is morally bad because it funds organized crime. Lots of women are forced into being in pornography by criminals.
You are wrong organized crime is also involved in pornography.
You sure you're not thinking "prostitution" instead of "pornography"? People who do pornography usually choose to do it, prostitution no.
Age 31
Male
London
Seen November 2nd, 2014
Posted October 10th, 2012
178 posts
15.1 Years
If women want to 'degrade themselves' then why stop them? Some female porn stars make a great deal of money and still hold down relatively normal relationships, if they do this voluntarily then good for them! Who are we to condemn their actions? After all, when an industry is producing something it is producing it in the expectation that people deem it useful or desirable. So, if you think that Pornography is wrong you need to take a look at why it is being made and that "blame" is laid on almost everyone in a society which has a definite sexual focus.

@Jolene

Sure, some people are coerced into doing pornography, but this is a different issue. Pornography itself isn't wrong because some people in the industry are engaged in coercive activities, I fully agree that these people should be prevented from acting in this way, but this is about the people involved, not the act or the product. Suppose, for example, a clothes manufacturer. It is quite reasonable to presume it possible that there have been and are clothing manufacturers who are engaged in coercive activities, violating the rights of workers, intimidating competitors or bribing the authorities to gain an advantage. The blame must be laid upon those people who are engaged in these acitivities, not the clothing industry which is a perfect;y acceptable one.


Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito

Zeta Sukuna

Descendant of the Inchlings

Age 29
Southern Florida
Seen 2 Days Ago
Posted 4 Days Ago
1,712 posts
15.3 Years
I think that porn isn't immoral, due to the fact that it is natural. Porn has existed for a LONG time. Drawings, sculptures, and it eventually mutated into the movies of today. I don't find any kind of porn immoral, so long as it's consensual, which most porn is. There are a few cases here and there that aren't, but for the most part, it is.

Pornography makes a HELL of a lot of money, too. They're not going to stop it. And about organized crime making pornography... you'd be right if this was the 70s, but it's not. Porn is controlled nowadays, by the same type of people that produce goods. Big Businesses. Oh yeah, there are people who film themselves for fun, and maybe some criminals film it, but a LOT of it nowadays is produced by big businesses. The majority, I don't know by how much, though.

Pokeyomom

Hoenn no you didn't...

Oregon
Seen January 13th, 2013
Posted April 17th, 2011
743 posts
14.1 Years
I think that porn isn't immoral, due to the fact that it is natural. Porn has existed for a LONG time. Drawings, sculptures, and it eventually mutated into the movies of today.
Drawings of slight busted women are far from being equivalent to porn flicks about mothers and sons, nasty ho'$, cheating wives, etc. Go look up any free porn site, and you will be hard pressed to find any depiction of sexuality that isn't perverse to some degree.

I still agree that porn should be legal, but a lot of it is very seedy. It seems like people are never quite satisfied with sexuality. Perhaps sexuality evolves, and all the weird/kinky flicks out there are just the latest manifestation of a "progression". I just think the slippery slope principle is applicaple to porn; it's okay to a point, but when do we draw the line as a society?

Now I can't cite peer reviewed literature, but many psychologists and social scientists will attest to how damaging porno can be to a psyche. It seems feasible that it could warp your sexual palate.

It would be easy enough to say something like "well cigarettes can be damaging too, but they should be legal because blah blah blah", and maybe this is right. I just feel like some forms of porno are way overboard, even when they are consensual, between adults, etc. I'm sure all kinds of moral zeal could be rallied here, such as porno is desanctifying sexuality, etc, but it's tough to quantify the real world effects of porno. What a loaded subject!:nervous:

In summary: I believe goverments should take stringent measures to curtail certain types of porn. I know they already do for child pornography, and beastiality, but perhaps it needs to be taken a step further?

Zeta Sukuna

Descendant of the Inchlings

Age 29
Southern Florida
Seen 2 Days Ago
Posted 4 Days Ago
1,712 posts
15.3 Years
Drawings of slight busted women are far from being equivalent to porn flicks about mothers and sons, nasty ho'$, cheating wives, etc. Go look up any free porn site, and you will be hard pressed to find any depiction of sexuality that isn't perverse to some degree.
One extreme to another, no? Guess what? It still isn't hardly any different. There have likely been drawings such as that even before. I never said it was equivalent to today's stuff, I stated that it mutated into today's stuff. That spiel was just me saying that it existed for a long time in one form or another. Yes, it could have been tamer, but it still existed.

I still agree that porn should be legal, but a lot of it is very seedy. It seems like people are never quite satisfied with sexuality. Perhaps sexuality evolves, and all the weird/kinky flicks out there are just the latest manifestation of a "progression". I just think the slippery slope principle is applicaple to porn; it's okay to a point, but when do we draw the line as a society?
Sexuality is natural, they shouldn't be satisfied, since it is what we were programmed to do. As males, we were programmed to have sex with a lot of women, in order to produce offspring. And females were programmed to keep males with them to protect them. They did this by offering sex. If people were satisfied, then they wouldn't have any desire to HAVE sex, which, unless you have a kid, is bad in terms of spreading your genes.

But there is likely a chance I misunderstood this part.

Now I can't cite peer reviewed literature, but many psychologists and social scientists will attest to how damaging porno can be to a psyche. It seems feasible that it could warp your sexual palate.
Porn can damage psyches, if you're not ready for it. But so can scary movies, and games. Anything, really, can damage a psyche, which is why we have so many phobias.

It would be easy enough to say something like "well cigarettes can be damaging too, but they should be legal because blah blah blah", and maybe this is right. I just feel like some forms of porno are way overboard, even when they are consensual, between adults, etc. I'm sure all kinds of moral zeal could be rallied here, such as porno is desanctifying sexuality, etc, but it's tough to quantify the real world effects of porno. What a loaded subject!
Didn't copy paste the smiley since I despise those smilies. Anyway, there are people who would argue against that, like I am. Porn that is overboard, is only overboard because you were raised to believe as such. Fetishes are things that arouse you, whether a man or a woman has one, they happen during sexual development. You have fetishes, I have fetishes, and chances are that they vary. This hard core stuff has an audience, it isn't hurting anyone and it makes the stars and the company money. I don't see what's wrong with it.

In summary: I believe goverments should take stringent measures to curtail certain types of porn. I know they already do for child pornography, and beastiality, but perhaps it needs to be taken a step further?
I personally believe it should remain as is. Basically this summation makes you sound like you want to ban porn that isn't straight up sex. Does it matter, so long as no one is really hurt?

Esper

California
Seen June 30th, 2018
Posted June 30th, 2018
Pornography itself isn't wrong because some people in the industry are engaged in coercive activities, I fully agree that these people should be prevented from acting in this way, but this is about the people involved, not the act or the product.
One could argue that if pornography is likely, or has an established track record of coercing people then it is, by its nature, wrong. I have no knowledge indicating that it is or isn't; I'm merely pointing this out to illustrate a point about reinforcing stereotypes.

Where pornography can be argued to be morally unjust is in its depictions of women (also men, but let's not get into that just yet) in degrading and/or submissive positions (both social/psychological positions and more visibly obvious ones). Porn can reinforce the idea that women are objects - sexual objects - depending on what kind of porn it is. Gay porn probably doesn't run this risk and perhaps not all porn is made to depict an active/dominant male and a passive/submissive female, but certainly some does. I'm not really certain that it's a common enough depiction to constitute a pattern, but if it is then one could justifiably say that porn does degrade and harm women.

And how does an avid porn watcher really differentiate themselves from Voyeurism (which is technically a mental disorder) or how much watching would merit an addiction.
For those who don't know, voyeurism is a disorder where people get sexual gratification from seeing a naked body or sexual acts. This, though, becomes criminal when the offender begins to act more like a "peeping tom" than a porn watcher.. but they are closely connected in a way.
Isn't the important difference that in watching porn you're watching a performer who knows they will be watched and has presumably given their permission for you to do so while with voyeurism you are infringing on someone's privacy?
Female
Sydney, Australia
Seen June 19th, 2011
Posted December 14th, 2010
1,499 posts
17.9 Years
I feel that things can only be immoral if someone is having to do something without their consent or if they are being taken advantage of.

Under this umbrella if you will, pornography and morality is a subject that does not need to be discussed.

I'm talking about professional pornography, not homemade ones as they are often posted without consent.

Pokeyomom

Hoenn no you didn't...

Oregon
Seen January 13th, 2013
Posted April 17th, 2011
743 posts
14.1 Years
O yikes. Multi-quotes abound:)

One extreme to another, no? Guess what? It still isn't hardly any different.
I was simply trying to cross the spectrum from your historical reference of nudity to today's porn. I think you are making the point that a naked body is a naked body. Is this correct? My assertions are based around context, in which case it is way different. I understand we could crop up evolutionary correlations and historical examples (greeks anyone?) of sexuality that is radically different from our own paradigm. But just because something has happened in history doesn't make it "right". I use the term right as in not conducive to a societies/individuals well being.
If you argue that something is "natural", because it mutated from a previous form that was completely natural, then I understand your position. I just happen to think that this is orthogonal to the point, and doesn't really help us understand this ~moral dilemma~ any better. DNA mutations in normal cells can cause cancer, and I'll think you'll agree that cancer cells are radically different from normal cells.

Sexuality is natural, they shouldn't be satisfied, since it is what we were programmed to do. As males, we were programmed to have sex with a lot of women, in order to produce offspring. And females were programmed to keep males with them to protect them. They did this by offering sex. If people were satisfied, then they wouldn't have any desire to HAVE sex, which, unless you have a kid, is bad in terms of spreading your genes.
But there is likely a chance I misunderstood this part.
Yeah, you misunderstood. We are meant to propagate the species, and sexuality is 100% natural. The problem is you are representing sexuality as one all encompassing term. It's safe to say that there are many different types of sexual activity, and that some types vary dramatically from other types.Types of sexual activity are what I was discussing. I don't want to discuss this in too much detail, as I think it would probably violate the poke forum commandments haha. Suffice to say that sexuality seems to become increasingly kinky/bizarre. This is fine, to an extent, but there is eventually a point where this becomes unhealthy (pedophilia, rape, insect, etc, etc, etc, etc).

Even if you argue that our wildest sexual fantasies are natural (which is fair enough), it still doesn't make some of them ok to encourage.

Porn can damage psyches, if you're not ready for it. But so can scary movies, and games. Anything, really, can damage a psyche, which is why we have so many phobias.
Okay- in your opinion. Here is mine- games and movies are more app to damage developing psyches. Porn, on the other hand, can damage even a mature psyche. Also- games and movies depict things that, while may be damaging to the psyche, can easily be put into perspective by our societal and cultural values. Sexual perversion, on the other hand, is something that is a bit more "in the gray" (as evidenced by this discussion).

Didn't copy paste the smiley since I despise those smilies.
Such is the case with most smiley rebels:pirate:

Anyway, there are people who would argue against that, like I am. Porn that is overboard, is only overboard because you were raised to believe as such. Fetishes are things that arouse you, whether a man or a woman has one, they happen during sexual development. You have fetishes, I have fetishes, and chances are that they vary. This hard core stuff has an audience, it isn't hurting anyone and it makes the stars and the company money. I don't see what's wrong with it.
Well that is a valid argument that is based around complete moral relativism . I'm not a moral absolutist by any means, but by the standard of what you are saying, gang bangs, mock rapes, and bukkake fests are all completely normal- I just find them overboard because I was raised to believe as such? First this assumes I completely adopt my parents ideologies, and that is false. It also means that you argue no porn is overboard.

And this statement "the hardcore stuff isn't hurting anyone" is so inane it echoes it's own refutations a thousand times over. There is no need to address this one. Think indirect effects.

I personally believe it should remain as is. Basically this summation makes you sound like you want to ban porn that isn't straight up sex. Does it matter, so long as no one is really hurt?
Not true. I made my last sentence an open ended question for a reason. I don't think you, me, or any other joe poster could make a completely accurate judgment about the effects of porn in society. It would take a myriad of professional researchers to establish the true effects of different styles of porn. With this in mind, I just want to make it clear that any post in this thread is purely personal opinion.

... And in my opinion: Yes it does matter. I believe that certain styles of porno can definitely cause direct/indirect damage to individuals and societies at large.

(I hope this post doesn't come off as inflammatory- I enjoy healthy argument, and am not hating on anyone else's opinion!)

Zet

Age 33
Male
Brisbane, Australia
Seen September 29th, 2021
Posted May 16th, 2020
7,687 posts
15.7 Years
Drawings of slight busted women are far from being equivalent to porn flicks about mothers and sons, nasty ho'$, cheating wives, etc. Go look up any free porn site, and you will be hard pressed to find any depiction of sexuality that isn't perverse to some degree.
Someone has done their research before posting here :P


I don't find porn to be immoral because those people chose to do what they did for whatever reason, and I don't care what that reason was. It can be for the pleasure, thrill, excitement or even just the money.

Though I don't hate the people that find it immoral since I'm a pretty open minded guy, but they really should stop preaching their cause when no one really listens to them.

Pokeyomom

Hoenn no you didn't...

Oregon
Seen January 13th, 2013
Posted April 17th, 2011
743 posts
14.1 Years
Though I don't hate the people that find it immoral since I'm a pretty open minded guy, but they really should stop preaching their cause when no one really listens to them.
Ummm.. This thread is titled morality standpoints of pornography?

Also- nudity and pornography are not synonymous. Don't quite know how those two terms got confused. O_0