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

[Esquilax]

As I said, it's a legal grey area at best and in pornography a legal red area (except in the USA).

The broader issue is that the USA supplies pornography it thinks is acceptable, but that everywhere else thinks is not. Just like Denmark in the 1970's and their legally produced child porn.

Which is why I'm not terrible interested in the legality of all this, over and above the moral arguments for it which should, ideally but evidently not always in practice, be leading the law.

We've also, frankly, strayed beyond what my original point was meant to convey, which was that Aurora Snow's article doesn't contain anything that I would consider "nightmarish." Whether or not the scene actually was like that is neither here nor there; I can only comment on what she chose to write about and what she describes is not reflective of her conclusion.

As far as harm in pornography - or the broader adult industry - I don't think the argument can be made that harm is OK. Or for that matter that it's okay to perform high-risk scenes without condoms.

I think that a distinction should be made between harm and pain, too. I agree with you with regards to condoms, but as regards bdsm toys they're generally engineered to provide sensation, not injury. Conflating pain and harm is kind of a non-starter: an injection hurts, but it's not causing you harm. Getting flogged hurts, but it doesn't harm, especially not when that's what gets you off.

Now you can argue "oh well nurses are at risk of contracting HIV too you know" - that's true, that's why we have safeguards in place. We don't let them perform extremely risky behaviour. Same thing with the sex industry - condoms are mandatory in the Australian sex industry.

As for Kink, perhaps you can explain it to me, but it was my understanding that condom-use was made mandatory in 2012 across LA and enforceable in all public venues (ie booked venues), and Kink continues to ignore the law:

Oh, I'm not here to be a Kink apologist: if that's what they're doing then their policy is idiotic and should be changed. I'm not going to defend everything they do, just the parts that I feel are defensible.

STIs are much higher in porn performers than the general population, and although gay porn uses condoms (and refuses to do HIV or STI testing), "straight porn" traditionally refuses to use condoms and relies on ineffective STI testing (ineffective since there have been at least 5 outbreaks in the past 10 years requiring a suspension of the industry's activities including one this year).

You need to think beyond the scope of BDSM in your private life - you're in control of the activity and the risks involved. In the sex-industry (including pornography), regardless of whether it's BDSM or other activity you are not in control of all the risks.

I'm... not here arguing against safety measures for the health of porn actors. I'm really just taking issue with that one link you posted on the other page.

Yes that is the legislated line - violence or simulated violence isn't acceptable according to our classification system.

Then- and I know this sounds really bad to read it out of context - the law should be changed. Overly broad rulings like that have no place governing real life.

[Aractus]

FYI I didn't post pornographic material (the edit description makes it look like I posted porn on here), I posted a documentary that was aired on free to air TV in the UK, and the video I linked was age-restricted (you had to log-in to confirm your age to view it). In response I'll simply give a description of it (because the one on IMDB is totally inaccurate but by all means read it and make up your own minds).

Date My Porn Star...

This documentary takes three porn fans from the UK to the USA to meet and then date their favourite porn stars. Like other documentaries on porn it is not for the faint-hearted as it aims to provide a pretty raw and accurate depiction of the environment that porn is produced in. The other series I'm thinking of is "The Dark Side of Porn". In that series there's an episode called "Dairy of a Porn Virgin" which follows a newcomer to porn. After her very first hardcore shoot (which was a lesbian scene; not her first porn scene, but her first "professional/hardcore" scene) it shows "Frankie" as being very visibly upset (28 minutes in). Afterwards she says "I didn't enjoy that really... at all." Following that scene the producer is shown trying to pressure Frankie to perform anal in the next scene, which she refuses to do. Midway through the filming of the next scene she is also shown to be very visibly upset.

But on to "Date my Porn Star".. before the porn fans leave they are taken to a porn set in the UK, where none of them seem upset or distressed by what they see, and the two straight men seem to enjoy seeing the scene being filmed. After that scene they're shown another scene, a gay scene, being filmed. Danny enjoys it, the other two are somewhat uncomfortable and Jonathan actually leaves the room mid-scene because of his discomfort.

In the USA it's another matter.

Before they leave for the USA, Jonathan says "I'm sure you're going to try ans care us with some of the events, but it's going to be great". They're all looking forward to it.

Danny gets to meet his favourite bisexual porn star, Kevin (not the other Kevin, and that's not his pornstar pseudonym), who is actually straight and doesn't have gay sex at all (his films are actually softcore). Despite this, Kevin is very nice to Danny and spends Sunday with him. He explains that his daughter doesn't talk to him due to his career, and that it's affected a lot of his personal relationships. He also tells Danny that he wants to go in a new direction and leave his porn behind. A quick google search reveals that he did in fact leave his porn persona around the time of the documentary.

Kevin (the porn fan) gets to meet and "date" J.J., who has her own porn production company and is in control of what gets produced, thus her scenes are clearly what she wants to do. J.J. is much more interested in finding out about him than he is in her (in their conversations), and they clearly have little in common. J.J. seems to wish she could be monogamous, whereas Kevin likes having as many women as possible.

Jonathan gets to meed and "date" T.T.. The scene is a "biological incest" theme scene, which he thinks is hot, and afterwards both Danny and Kevin are shocked at the subject content of the scene that Jonathan just saw. Danny reacts by saying "who watches this porn!" Like Kevin and J.J., T.T. seems to be more interested in finding out about Jonathan than he is about her.

They're then taken to a lower-budget set where the porn performers are much less experienced (although it should be noted that they have done porn before, maybe for a few weeks or a few months, but the girls are not veterans). This set pushes all three fans to their breaking points - to see how distressed and upset the girls get while filming, and to see how they're treated by the producers. After their time on that set Danny says "it's disgusting what I saw today, it was absolutely disgusting and heartbreaking what I saw today it was absolutely heartbreaking". And that was just regular "low budget" scenes, it wasn't BDSM or some of the "really hard" stuff. The three of them debate it - do they know what they're doing, are they well informed, who's looking out for their interests? At this point it's also explained to them that there is not enough work in LA to sustain full-time work for female performers (nor for that matter is there for men). The porn producer says that there's about 50 scenes being shot a day across LA and about 500 active female porn-stars. There is plenty more information on this e.g. Aurora Snow says:

People are often surprised to hear that a famous porn star may perform a sex scene, headline a film, and even get on the box cover, all for one flat rate with no residuals. Usually, a female charges $800 to $1,000 for a boy/girl scene, $900 to $1,200 for “backdoor” action, and an additional $100 for each added scene partner. Rates for a girl/girl scene are significantly lower, averaging from $600 to $900. Rates dip even lower yet if it’s an oral-only scene, starting at $250.

Men charge $200 to $600 (almost half that of their female counterparts), though men are hired more frequently. Some male performers have been known to show up for $100. Others provide their equipment for an oral scene for just $50. The cream of the crop usually garners a few hundred more than your average person. Out of the hundreds in the business, only a handful work regularly. Most struggle to work more than a few times a month, which in turn creates a bargaining tool for companies to hire talent at lower rates.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/20...think.html

This highlights the fact that porn performers once upon a time could get as much work as they wanted, but this is no longer the case. That's what Aurora said while she was still active in the industry. This is well known - most porn stars also do regular prostitution, most do not admit this while they're active because the USA is backwards and prostitution is illegal, but it's well known and documented across the web.

For the finale they get to meet ex-porn star Vanessa Balmont. She explains some of the truly horrific things experienced by performers, including that she had to take painkillers in some scenes and was still in pain whilst performing. The men are all shocked and upset by what she has to tell them. It perhaps broke the illusion for them once and for all that performers enjoy the scenes they do, hearing about some of the consequences that the producers clearly don't care about.

All documentaries have an agenda, that's true. These guys all changed their opinions based on what they saw and their "illusions" of what they though porn was had been broken. There are ex-porn stars who do not say they hated their time performing - see Aurora's stuff on thedailybeast.com. But even she levels criticisms - even she admits that she was pressured to perform with a co-star who did not have their A.I.M. STI-test with them (and she refused, and was not even paid a cancellation for wasting her time).

Faced with the reality of porn as it exists today, all three fans were shocked. It's important to note that the documentary never seems to criticise the gay porn industry, in which men are obviously equal performers on set with each other. For "straight" porn it's another matter. The conclusion is simple: it's a sex industry that doesn't pay well, that doesn't offer protection for its workers, and that doesn't care if their workers can earn enough to support themselves or not. It's much like a sex industry in a 3rd world country - primitive and backwards.

---

Which is why I'm not terrible interested in the legality of all this, over and above the moral arguments for it which should, ideally but evidently not always in practice, be leading the law.

Well let me use another example then. It's legal for me to go out and have sex with a 16-year old. If I take photos (or video) of that, those depictions are classified as "child pornography" and are illegal.

There should be, and indeed there is (in Australia) some difference between what is legally O.K. in private life and what is legally acceptable in porn.

I agree with you with regards to condoms,

Well no you don't. You've never sent me $1. If you're a Kink viewer you support them and are actively indifferent to their opinion that they don't need to worry about the law or sexual health of their performers.

Getting flogged hurts, but it doesn't harm, especially not when that's what gets you off.

Yes I understand what you're saying. What I was talking about is STIs, anal and vaginal tearing and bleeding, bruising, and persisting with such activities through pain (where in private life most people would choose to stop).

Then- and I know this sounds really bad to read it out of context - the law should be changed. Overly broad rulings like that have no place governing real life.

Yes and I'm telling you that I don't want to see simulated-rape being legalised in Australia. In fact, it shouldn't even be legal in the USA. Just the cost to courts alone that it has had would tell you that it's having a real negative effect on society.

[Natachan]

Yes and I'm telling you that I don't want to see simulated-rape being legalised in Australia. In fact, it shouldn't even be legal in the USA. Just the cost to courts alone that it has had would tell you that it's having a real negative effect on society.

Why no simulated rape? If it's not actual rape then why ban it?

[Ksa]

Addiction...there's a dick in there huh lol. Load of crap.

Addiction in USA and Canada means perpetuating an unproductive behavior that is incompatible with the morals and social values of Capitalism. You can imagine that, in a society that is money driven and thrives on buying things you don't need, sex is disruptive. If instead of spending money buying things you don't need to feel good, you spend time in bed with your partner, you are a disaster to the economy. You are a home-grown terrorist.

As a capitalist, you belong spending money at the mall in order to drive the economy. You do not belong in bed having a good time with anyone. That is an abomination and if you do that you need professional help! But, the wealthy class can indeed have extended nights of sex on cocaine, dextro-amphetamine and MDMA, it's ok for them, but not for you. You have to WORK hard, and SPEND hard, so that they can be happy at your place, FOREVER. No drugs also!

Word of advice: Follow your instinct. Happiness is in you...and it wants to come out. You yourself will find the way. An idiot telling you on TV that wearing Kalvin Klein name on ur underwear is the way is a fucking idiot. Don't listen to him! You will feel sad, unfulfilled, and the next thing you know, you're on Xanax filling the pocket of pharmaceutical companies.

Capitalism relies on the fact that 99.9% of the population is clueless about how their dopaminergic reward system works. If they did, they would know that:

Dopamine spent focusing on a complex job for 8 hours = Dopamine spent on 15-50 orgasms

Every single day that you spend working for a job, is 15-50 orgasms worth of chemical reward less in your "living my life" portfolio. And the tragedy is that these people actually think they're living a good life! Unbelievable! But, with the Internet and the new generation getting smarter, we begin to realize what life is all about and we are much less likely to fall for bullshit lol.

There are some skeptics saying that, even if Romans held daylong orgies and that the high class is suspected of doing similar things, it's hard to picture someone having sex for more than an hour and if they took drugs, they would die. Well, let me tell you, they Don't. They don't fucking die. I can even describe, in great detail how they do it:

- They call 5-10 call-girls inbound to their condo, say, at 8:00pm on Friday night.
- They swallow 30mg of d-amphetamine XR and after 7 hours, they supplement with 5mg IR doses every 2 hours or so.
- The girls arrive and start sucking their dick, and they take turns, and they do so until 8:00pm Saturday.
- The girls take turn to eat their lunch, the men on d-amphetamine eat nothing for up to 48 hours.
- If after 24 hours the men feel their serotonin is not that high, they skip a second night.
- After the amphetamines crash, they pay the girls, dismiss them, and sleep for up to 24 hours straight.

They don't die, they don't get sick, they don't OD, they don't devellop much tolerance unlike common beliefs, and they do this for decades. And the blue collars, white collars and people having a "decent" and "normal" life only get a bit of satisfaction doing what? Laughing at Rob Ford on TV...what an idiot Rob Ford is! People are being robbed of their vital energy and they don't even know it! Of course they can't have sex for more than an hour...because they wasted their dopamine all day at work, and without amphetamines...they let go after 3 minutes and collapse into sleep. The people above, they do nothing all day...nothing...they eat quality food, exercise and are in great shape. No stress, no worries. Nothing. Just...bliss.

[Lucanus]

^This is going straight to cstdt RIGHT NOW

[Ksa]

^This is going straight to cstdt RIGHT NOW

Well, is it not right? How come people don't talk about job addiction? Americans are addicted to their jobs! In fact, jobs meet all criteria of addiction:

- individuals being paid a salary require higher and higher remunerations throughout their career just like drugs require higher and higher doses.
- adverse effects: they keep their jobs despite stress, exhaustion, overworking, depression etc.
- withdrawal symptoms: if they quit their jobs they're fucked, they end up under a bridge.

Why is nobody talking about that addiction? You people spend 40 hours per week doing something that makes you stressed, without which you can't live, and you talk about sex addiction? Who's the real addict?

Tell you what, when all Americans quit their jobs and demonstrate they can live a happy life without them, I will personally declare, sex, drugs, alcohol, tobacco and gambling to be an addiction and I'll abstain from it also!

[DramaQueen]

I heard that Singaporans are worse

[Chad32]

^This is going straight to cstdt RIGHT NOW

Well, is it not right? How come people don't talk about job addiction? Americans are addicted to their jobs! In fact, jobs meet all criteria of addiction:

- individuals being paid a salary require higher and higher remunerations throughout their career just like drugs require higher and higher doses.
- adverse effects: they keep their jobs despite stress, exhaustion, overworking, depression etc.
- withdrawal symptoms: if they quit their jobs they're fucked, they end up under a bridge.

Why is nobody talking about that addiction? You people spend 40 hours per week doing something that makes you stressed, without which you can't live, and you talk about sex addiction? Who's the real addict?

Tell you what, when all Americans quit their jobs and demonstrate they can live a happy life without them, I will personally declare, sex, drugs, alcohol, tobacco and gambling to be an addiction and I'll abstain from it also!

It used to be worse, back when the puritans were in charge and working was life. That's capitalism for you.

[Ksa]

It's a double standard that's what it is. All these managers perversely watching a new worker showing up for work in a new Honda Civic thinking "he's fucked now, he has to pay his car rent, we got him now he can't leave us, it's time to give him REAL workload".

Sex addiction? That's merely your right of expressing the joy, bliss and the well being that nature has prepared you to experience. It's not a fucking addiction. Jobs are an addiction because jobs prevent you from having sex and enjoying life, not the other way around, sex is an addiction because it prevents you from performing at your job. What a retarded way of putting things... well, let's go along with it:

You abstain from extensive sex and...you're better rested, you perform better at your job. Then what? You possibly get promoted...then what? You make more money sure, you can buy a more expensive car, a better house and you can crank up the heat during winter...and you can stick a Kalvin Klein sticker on your ass more often...then what? Then you're 60 years old...you got a belly...that flows on top of your belt and...everybody is waiting for you to die from cancer because now that they've used you up, they don't want to pay you your retirement.

Do you guys really need to live until you're 60 or 70 to realize the Truth? Your job, is your REAL addiction, a thing you cannot quit. I haven't come across a single substance that someone couldn't quit. Heroin, amphetamines, Klonopin...they all manage to quit it. The job however they can't...and if they do, they end up on the sidewalk, miserable, cold, suffering. Look at the next homeless person, next time you travel...and tell me: What substance can make someone so miserable after he quits it? Heroin? No. Amphetamines? No. There isn't a single substance that can reduce a person to total ruin after quitting it, like quitting a job can.

Then people may argue, drugs are dangerous ok...you can die. Need I remind them that they die not because drugs are dangerous but because people aren't trained on how to use them. And even so, more people die in America while performing a job, than from drugs. Check the statistics. And they are being trained on performing their jobs! Despite that, more casualties. Life insurance pays triple if you die on a business trip!

Sometimes I think about Hell...and I'm wondering if we're not already there.

[DramaQueen]

Where will you get the money from?
I'm not talking about consumerism here, just survival