'Extreme Pornography'

Kadark said:
At some point or another, the question must inevitably be raised: "Does any of this seem natural?"
Click to expand...

Isn't all sex "natural" regardless of how strange, sick or gross it may seem? It may not be normal or average, but it's still natural.
 
CutsieMarie89 said:
Isn't all sex "natural" regardless of how strange, sick or gross it may seem? It may not be normal or average, but it's still natural.
Click to expand...

Having sex to procreate is natural. For some animals (like us), sex for pleasure is natural, as well.

However, by all standards, sex between strangers for the profit of the participants, and for the revenue of its distributors and marketers, is completely unnatural. So is the bestiality and incest pornography available on the Internet.


Kadark
 
Kadark said:
Having sex to procreate is natural. For some animals (like us), sex for pleasure is natural, as well.

However, by all standards, sex between strangers for the profit of the participants, and for the revenue of its distributors and marketers, is completely unnatural. So is the bestiality and incest pornography available on the Internet.
Click to expand...

All of that statement hinges on one concept ..."natural". It also hinges on the universal acceptance of your definition. I.e., if fuckin' a goat is "natural" for one person, isn't it natural for him?

By the same token, isn't the purchase and enjoyment of porno "natural"? If not, then there's just one helluva lot of UN-natural people in the world. Porno is multi-gazilion dollar industry ...how can you call it UN-natural?

Baron Max
 
Your inability to think critically is showing. Sure, the actors and actresses bringing the pornography to screen are not physically harmed during the making of a given film. However, you must ask yourself, "would a rational individual believe the process simply ended there?" Pornography corrupts individuals, and instills in them unrealistic notions of sex and relationships. It is wholly demeaning to women, and targets young and poor girls who have trouble with their families. This is the act of a predator, or more properly, pornography. Unfortunately, mainstream pornography is the "softest" type there is, nowadays. Can you believe that beastiality, incest, and child pornography can be viewed by virtually every individual, including children? They are all a mouse-click away. That, to me, is very unnerving.
Click to expand...

They may only be a mouseclick away, but they are also illegal. If you were found with images of child pornography on your computer you could very easily land yourself in prison. That is not the point in question.

I think you have become a little confused: the OP was proposing a discussion on further dividing this term of 'extreme pornography' to make leeway for consenting adults. I think sex with children and animals is in a completely different league to 'horror-themed porn' with no actual harm. Yet, they both come under the same name in the eyes of the law.
A second point was that such images are seen as acceptable on the big screen in films such as the Saw series and Hostel. While images of the like are incriminating if downloaded from the internet. Up to speed, sir?

If you believe you can allow certain versions of pornography to exist, yet resolutely reject the others, then you are sorely mistaken. As long as there is an audience, and the capability to produce the material exists, then you can rest assured that exist it will. Pornography thirty years ago was much milder, and much more tame than the pornography we see today. If you haven't already noticed, the content of porn, and the subjects it incorporates, perpetually worsens over time. Following this distinct trend, who is to say the concepts we fear and protest today will not be discreetly welcomed tomorrow? A few legal loopholes, and child pornography is allowed, under the pretense of "art". All things considered, it's not a farfetched notion. The more one views pornography, the more one wishes to see increased brutality, unnaturalness, etc. Once the regular content becomes boring, the mind demands something new. Unfortunately, that "new" content is in strict violation of every standard of morality and nature we know.
Click to expand...

I see, and what do you suggest? Censorship of the internet?
 
Orleander said:
and what is the line? being tied up? Wearing a diaper? being a furry? golden showers? gay sex?
Which one is mentally ill?
Click to expand...

personally i see nothing wrong with any of those!

(i have to admit though i find golden showers a BIG turn of)
 
Agree with Luci. None of those are wrong, because they are consensual.

Sure, you could argue that if one guy wants his dick cut off and fried to eat, so long as it's consensual, that's fine. But none of those behaviours described involve either injuring anyone or doing something irreversible to anyone. So I see nothing wrong with them.
 
visceral_instinct said:
Same here. I like porn, but it could really do with being a bit more, I don't know, 'atmospheric'.
Click to expand...
Usually whats missing in erotica is a CONTEXT.

For example, if you paint a yellow dot on a canvas...its just a boring yellow dot.

But if you give it a context, with sky and clouds and a landscape...suddenly it becomes the sun.
 
Kadark said:
Having sex to procreate is natural. For some animals (like us), sex for pleasure is natural, as well.

However, by all standards, sex between strangers for the profit of the participants
Kadark
Click to expand...

Penguins and bonobos both have prostitution.
 
I saw a site where a woman's breast was put over a board and a nail hammered through it. I have to wonder how many willing non-drugged women are participating in extreme porn. How is this porn anyways??
 
Orleander said:
I saw a site where a woman's breast was put over a board and a nail hammered through it. I have to wonder how many willing non-drugged women are participating in extreme porn. How is this porn anyways??
Click to expand...

UGH....

I have heard of gay men doing that with their penises...apparently a way of showing how tough you are...:bugeye:
 
JDawg said:
There's no reason to make that kind of pornography illegal. As Lucifer said (no pun intended) there are plenty of men and women alike who are very into that kind of sex. I mean, what does "threaten the person's life" even mean? If I had typical sex on top of a washing machine, there's a chance one or both of us could fall off and break our necks. Should spin-cycle sex be illegal? Of course not.

I actually dated a girl who wanted to be beaten up during sex. It was a real turn-off for me, but she loved it. Needless to say, the relationship didn't last long.
Click to expand...
LOL "As Lucifer said" :D
 
CutsieMarie89 said:
Isn't all sex "natural" regardless of how strange, sick or gross it may seem? It may not be normal or average, but it's still natural.
Click to expand...

Frida Kahlo is quoted as saying that the only unnatural sex act is one that you cannot perform. There is some truth to this of course as whatever you do would seem natural to you but I still think there can be psychological reasons why some acts that are deemed paraphilia become natural for an individual. I think ones sexuality can become perverse for these reasons.
 
james, have you ever watched an easter "cellibration" in the phillaphines? (they actually get nailed to crosses there, for real)

Anyway i agree to an extent. Child porn and beastality involves no consent. Necrophila is more troublesome because its concivable that either a) people are faking it (for instance by having one party lie in an ice bath and lay still) and b) its concivable that someone could donate there body for this purpose.

However S&M which is consentual EVEN if it involves physical injury should NOT be illegal for the same reasons piercings and tattoos arnt illegal. They involve consent.
 
Cellar_Door said:
Sounds delightful, doesn't it. :rolleyes: However, I think it raises an interesting moral point.

Should 'extreme pornography' really be illegal? Surely it's better for a necrophiliac or sadist to get their sexual kicks from a staged scene rather than a real-life situation. Like it or not, these people exist, and their repressed urges are often much stronger than an average person's libido. Ever see the documentary with Louis Theroux? It appears to me sites such as 'necrobabes' (search on wiki, NOT on Google) that contain no explicit sexual images and contain photos of only consenting models pretending to be dead come under unfair censorship.

Or alternatively, will such pornography only serve to encourage the individual?
Click to expand...

why don't we just exterminate all the people who are so fucked up they can't even figure out sex?
 
Orleander said:
I saw a site where a woman's breast was put over a board and a nail hammered through it. I have to wonder how many willing non-drugged women are participating in extreme porn. How is this porn anyways??
Click to expand...

Oh god don't stop there, I was just about to cum you tease.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top