My brother's bible class was teaching him about "addiction"

[MusicLovingAtheist]

I told him that sex and porn are a good thing because it releases endorphins into your brain and it's good for your dick and there are benefits to having sex. I told asked him what the science behind this is and he said "what does science have to do with anything." He thinks that sex is a moral decision.

I think you need to be very careful about what you claim when it comes to the sex industry.

Pink Cross Foundation claims that the life expectancy for porn performers is 36.2 years.

Then you have seasoned porn performers who defend the industry at every opportunity who come out and say this:

• It was late in my career and I was already famous with hundreds of movies under my belt, but nothing like this. I’d shied away from the BDSM culture. It scared me. Despite signing paperwork and a checklist of dos and don'ts, I was in way over my head. What I thought I was agreeing to felt a lot different in reality. I was groped by hands I didn't know. There were masked people everywhere, but only the ones wearing wristbands were my approved scene partners. If I balked at an act or found it difficult to perform, I was “punished” for my defiance (which is the nature of a BDSM scene). It felt more like a party for the extras than a professional scene. Experienced as I was, it was new to me. I’d never used a safe word before (and forgot to), so when things became too much to bear and I began protesting, no one listened. The word “No” doesn't work in these types of scenes.
  
  I met my breaking point in this particular scene—halfway through, I had to be untied and calmed down. I was shaking. I felt a catch in my throat when I tried to speak and I could barely keep the tears at bay. I felt like I’d been beat. Yet I was hugged, inundated with compliments, and told how strong I was for being on the receiving end. I was caned, electrically prodded, and slapped around. I didn't feel powerful. In the interim, I had to decide whether I was going to quit or be a professional and finish the scene. After everything I'd gone through, leaving would have made it worthless. So I stayed.
  
  ...
  
  While there are plenty of porn stars who regularly work for Kink and sing their praises, those that have had a negative experience are hesitant to speak up, fearing what it would do to their workload. Kink is one of the few large companies with the budget to offer steady work. Some people in the porn industry, it seems, would rather have work they don't like than no work at all.

---

Also, you may have heard of Alyssa Funke - a straight A student. At 19 years old she killed herself following cyber-bullying:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K16e3OroZvc

Also, like most women in porn she came from a troubled household.

What the fuck does any of this have to do with sex being bad? She killed herself because she was bullied. I don't know what that other stuff means. That story is from fox news. Most of the porn I look at is just pictures. I mean for your health it's perfectly fine.

[SteelCurtain]

MLA, I agree with Jenny A. He's 15, probably not going to be a lot of serious debates coming from his direction. His behavior stinks of lashing out because of shame. He's likely doing the very thing he is claiming to be a "moral" act behind closed doors, and is sticking to his guns out of shame and typical stubbornness.

As for you, one of the best tactics when debating people is to ask for sources when they make positive claims. When your brother says things like "masturbation lowers testosterone," get a source. Is he just talking out of the side of his face? Does he have any evidence for this claim? Also, give yourself time to think and use logic. Just to use his example: is he suggesting that testosterone is somehow stored in semen? Or that there is a hormonal fluctuation that coincides with ejaculation? If testosterone did actually decrease when you masturbate, in what manner would that be a negative thing? Ask questions in a debate to determine your opponent's meaning, and then tear it apart using those very questions and their answers. Above all, do not make emotional jabs or unfounded statements, it only weakens your position.

[Aractus]

What the fuck does any of this have to do with sex being bad?

Nothing, and I don't know why you're being impolite, I was talking about the sex industry - prostitution and pornography.

She killed herself because she was bullied.

Which is what I said.

I don't know what that other stuff means.

According to Pink Cross the life expectancy for porn performers is about 1/2 that of the general population in the USA. I wouldn't take their figures as gospel, however it's a starting point and there are plenty of other studies showing that sex workers have a substantially lower life expectancy than the general population (for instance, this one).

That story is from fox news.

So?

Most of the porn I look at is just pictures. I mean for your health it's perfectly fine.

Again, I'm talking about the health of sex workers. Prostitutes and porn performers.

[Alex K]

I didn't even know he was religious until a couple days ago.

Well, maybe he wasn't before

Anyways, so he's 15, about the time you figure out your own sexuality. He possibly doesn't know what to do with it yet. If I were you I'd simply tell him that - that he needs to figure these things out for himself, and that you think (I presume) that all these strange ideas from church are hurtful in developing a natural relationship to sex. It really shouldn't be about you being right and him being wrong (like, who cares anyway), but about your worries that he develops an unhealthy relationship to sex and his body because of the church influence.

Anyways, the only thing masturbation lowers is the risk for testicular cancer. Also, going through the world horny all the time can be awfully distracting.

[Esquilax]

Then you have seasoned porn performers who defend the industry at every opportunity who come out and say this:

I have super mixed feelings about that interview.

I'm a part of the Kink audience, I'm familiar with the kind of content they produce to the point where I can pretty much point out the sub-site this woman is talking about just from her descriptions; the mentions of masked men and extras makes me think of Publicdisgrace, which a short search of the site in question reveals that, indeed, she did a movie for that site that seems to match. And then several after, which I'll get into later.

The more I think about it, actually, the more I disagree with Aurora, the model who wrote this article, and it's not just because she did more shoots with the company. For one, what, exactly, was she expecting to happen? She didn't use her safeword, she didn't verbalize her desire to stop in a way that was agreed upon in advance, and once it became clear that she did want out she was untied and given, from what I've read, perfectly adequate aftercare. And this is a "nightmare"? Not only was she treated perfectly fine for the context, according to her own descriptions, but the failure of communication was hers.

This is a particularly frightening issue for me; as a dom, one of my greatest fears is unknowingly going beyond my sub's comfort zone and doing him or her actual harm. The need for a safeword, for all parties to be clear on what it means (and that it's not a failure or a disappointment to use it) is essential, and I know Kink goes through this with the models beforehand, because they do it on camera at the beginning of every movie. Their safewords aren't hard (it's the classic "yellow/red light" system) nor was the woman ever gagged in this particular shoot, which isn't to say she didn't have something in her mouth, just that she could remove it easily and anyway, Kink does secondary safeword signals for those cases; there's simply no reason she couldn't have used it, and no indication that the scene would have continued regardless if she had.

In BDSM scenes, people scream. They cry (Kink stops to get permission to continue when there's tears, by the way, so... ) and they bruise... it's hard to tell when that crosses the line from scene pain to legitimate pain. Maybe those involved should have been reading the sub's body language more closely, but come the fuck on: this stuff relies on communication from both parties, and she openly admits to not holding up her end of the deal. And it's a big deal; the dom might hold the flogger, but it's ultimately up to the sub to dictate the level of intensity she's comfortable with, which any dom worth their salt would comply with.

She had the right to speak up, and the appropriate means to do so. She didn't, and somehow that's the fault of everyone else, who did act appropriately?

Anyway, that's my little dom moment. Sorry to derail the thread.

[Aractus]

I'm a part of the Kink audience, I'm familiar with the kind of content they produce to the point where I can pretty much point out the sub-site this woman is talking about just from her descriptions; the mentions of masked men and extras makes me think of Publicdisgrace, which a short search of the site in question reveals that, indeed, she did a movie for that site that seems to match. And then several after, which I'll get into later.

And I should point out to you that much of their content is not legal in Australia. In Australia pornography (x-rated material) cannot depict violence of any kind (which at present is very poorly explained on the current website, but I assure you is accurate).

The more I think about it, actually, the more I disagree with Aurora, the model who wrote this article, and it's not just because she did more shoots with the company. For one, what, exactly, was she expecting to happen?

A consenting scene?

She didn't use her safeword, she didn't verbalize her desire to stop in a way that was agreed upon in advance, and once it became clear that she did want out she was untied and given, from what I've read, perfectly adequate aftercare.

That explanation is offensive to my sensibilities as a man. No means no. So what if she didn't use her agreed-upon safeword? If she forgot it she shouldn't be forced to perform acts against her will - we have a word for what that is: rape. And hiding behind such a flimsy defence most likely would not hold up in court if it had been pursued as a criminal matter.

This is a particularly frightening issue for me; as a dom, one of my greatest fears is unknowingly going beyond my sub's comfort zone and doing him or her actual harm. The need for a safeword, for all parties to be clear on what it means (and that it's not a failure or a disappointment to use it) is essential, and I know Kink goes through this with the models beforehand, because they do it on camera at the beginning of every movie. Their safewords aren't hard (it's the classic "yellow/red light" system) nor was the woman ever gagged in this particular shoot, which isn't to say she didn't have something in her mouth, just that she could remove it easily and anyway, Kink does secondary safeword signals for those cases; there's simply no reason she couldn't have used it, and no indication that the scene would have continued regardless if she had.

Again, you do not have a clear understanding of the technical legalities. Safe word or not a person cannot consent to actual harm - and if you say bruising was involved, that's actual harm my friend. No matter what the context actual harm cannot be consented to. If you choke or gag someone until they pass out or vomit that's also actual harm. And yes that makes a lot of sub-dom activity technically illegal which is all the more reason why it shouldn't be filmed and sold as "legitimate" pornography.

---

I have no gripe with you Esq., but just to give you an example - let's say you're in a sub-dom relationship and your girlfriend decides she's pissed off about something and goes to the police, covered in bruises and said "he did this to me". You get arrested and appear in front of a magistrate - do you think the magistrate cares if you had a consenting sub-dom relationship? No. Courts don't care how or why it happened, and they're not going to let you waste their time by explaining it. All they care about is did you inflict harm - yes - then you get sentenced. It's that simple. And that's why you legally cannot sell pornography that depicts (whether real or simulated) violence here (or in most countries). In the USA you can sell simulated-rape, and it's probably the only country in the world where that is legal.

[Esquilax]

And I should point out to you that much of their content is not legal in Australia. In Australia pornography (x-rated material) cannot depict violence of any kind (which at present is very poorly explained on the current website, but I assure you is accurate).

Wow, really? Huh, yet more retrograde crap from the Australian censors, if what Kink does is considered illegal. I'm sure the ratings board would have fainted on the spot, if they'd been around for the bad old days of this stuff.

A consenting scene?

How much more consenting can you get than a signed contract? It's a porn shoot, a lot of thought and effort and scheduling went into it, it's not like she didn't know what she was there for, so I think the presumption of consent could be concluded at the beginning of the shoot. And as she said, when it became clear that she had withdrawn consent, she was untied and looked after, and asked if she wanted to continue, whereupon she gave her consent again. At no point was she forced; the worst thing that happened was a lapse in communication.

That explanation is offensive to my sensibilities as a man. No means no. So what if she didn't use her agreed-upon safeword? If she forgot it she shouldn't be forced to perform acts against her will - we have a word for what that is: rape. And hiding behind such a flimsy defence most likely would not hold up in court if it had been pursued as a criminal matter.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I agree that no means no. I am one hundred percent behind you there, and am by no means acting as a rape apologist in this conversation.

Having said that, the reason safewords exist is to give either party in a kink scene a clear and unambiguous way of saying no within the context of sexual play that often incorporates begging and resistance that, while real, is within the agreed upon limits. Some subs want to be able to say no, to plead, without having their dom stop; they want to relinquish power and, conversely, there are some doms that want that too. The point of a safeword is to empower the sub to do just that, while still retaining their ability to clearly refuse something, should the situation arise.

So the actual timeline of what happened is that Aurora arrived on set, gave her interview beforehand demonstrating that she was consenting, never gave any of the clear and simple signals indicating withdrawal of that consent, was still able to withdraw from the scene when those on the set who WERE doing their jobs noticed something was up, and then gave her consent a second time once she had been allowed to cool off.

These guys are kinksters, they have a slightly different way of dealing with things. Some might argue that it's actually more clearly defined and responsible than vanilla sex, but the point is that in this one area the wording is slightly different, for a reason. By no reasonable definition was this girl raped: she said yes, never said no, said yes again, and then characterized it as a nightmare after the fact. It is deeply unfair to lay the blame at Kink's feet here, especially given how fast I've seen them stop when someone does need it to happen.

Again, you do not have a clear understanding of the technical legalities. Safe word or not a person cannot consent to actual harm - and if you say bruising was involved, that's actual harm my friend. No matter what the context actual harm cannot be consented to. If you choke or gag someone until they pass out or vomit that's also actual harm. And yes that makes a lot of sub-dom activity technically illegal which is all the more reason why it shouldn't be filmed and sold as "legitimate" pornography.

I'm not particularly interested in the legal side of it, as laws aren't necessarily right, and legislating sex has a long history of getting things wrong. I'm more interested in the moral dimension, where I can't see much more than a failure in communication which, while bad and worth working on, doesn't live up to the language Aurora is using to describe it.

[Aoi Magi]

I agree the religious brainwashing or any indoctrination for that matter, if not dealt with in the early stages, can become irreversible later on. But when you are talking about his thoughts on sex, those might not be religiously triggered. Most kids at that age can be shy about discussing sex and might retaliate in a similar manner, especially if they are introverted in nature. This should fix itself as he grows older and starts getting sex-ed+hormonal-rampage. If not, your parents are more than capable at handling it. Leave the sex talk aside for a bit and try to figure out his brainwashing level first, and if it seems serious, don't hesitate to talk to your parents despite what your brother says.

[Thumpalumpacus]

You can't make him share your views without tight reasoning. You can be his brother. At 15, he's going to be coming into sexual feelings if he hasn't started already, and that cognitive dissonace means that he'll perhaps be more receptive to hearing you out.

And yes, reject any bigotry he shops immediately, unless you want to hear it more often.

[Aractus]

I'm not particularly interested in the legal side of it, as laws aren't necessarily right, and legislating sex has a long history of getting things wrong. I'm more interested in the moral dimension, where I can't see much more than a failure in communication which, while bad and worth working on, doesn't live up to the language Aurora is using to describe it.

Well of course there's a legal side - and most people do not like the idea that people are "voluntarily" filling up hospitals. So legally of course it makes sense that causing another person harm is always wrong.

Now you missed my point - the type of activity depicted in Kink videos is legally grey at best, thus if it's legally grey in the first place it shouldn't be legally OK as acceptable pornography.