The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Isn't it strange how the world becomes more tolerant each day and we learn more about society and psychology and yet one news story can set us back a decade?
Porn - the one time scourge of nations and inspiration for 'Gentleman's Clubs' in Victorian Britain - has become less of a sensitive issue of late, making way for other forms which have become popular with the criminal and less desirable members of the public. But we still hide away porn mags in paper bags, videos (even softcore or sex manual ones) are disguised and frowns prevail at page 3 images.
So is it right to make soft porn a part of normal life? Does it harm people if the images are made by and of willing participants in an industry which has become more accepted and even embraced of late? Or does the acceptance of soft porn lead to other, less accepted forms or even for the viewer's mind to be damaged as some may argue?
There are obvious reasons why some forms, such as child pornography, are unacceptable in society and are rightly enforced with such vigour. But where is the line drawn on the adult porn industry and who is able to say what goes (and, maybe, where?!).
Certainly the sex debate has already raged across the TV screens, where once the sign of certain male or female anatomy was considered the ultimate taboo, now this is pushed further by the subject matter or the type of act being performed, but surely this should not relate to video, which is more controlled (if only slightly) as to the audience.
My personal view on these matters is that porn itself can enhance your own understanding of sex, but that this should also be measured with understanding of relationships in general and any 'sane' person would already have this if they had grown up with at least one responsible adult teaching them about life. It will always be frowned upon by some and will never be fully accepted as a mainstream entertainment simply because it is 'adult' and not suitable for children.
Porn - the one time scourge of nations and inspiration for 'Gentleman's Clubs' in Victorian Britain - has become less of a sensitive issue of late, making way for other forms which have become popular with the criminal and less desirable members of the public. But we still hide away porn mags in paper bags, videos (even softcore or sex manual ones) are disguised and frowns prevail at page 3 images.
So is it right to make soft porn a part of normal life? Does it harm people if the images are made by and of willing participants in an industry which has become more accepted and even embraced of late? Or does the acceptance of soft porn lead to other, less accepted forms or even for the viewer's mind to be damaged as some may argue?
There are obvious reasons why some forms, such as child pornography, are unacceptable in society and are rightly enforced with such vigour. But where is the line drawn on the adult porn industry and who is able to say what goes (and, maybe, where?!).
Certainly the sex debate has already raged across the TV screens, where once the sign of certain male or female anatomy was considered the ultimate taboo, now this is pushed further by the subject matter or the type of act being performed, but surely this should not relate to video, which is more controlled (if only slightly) as to the audience.
My personal view on these matters is that porn itself can enhance your own understanding of sex, but that this should also be measured with understanding of relationships in general and any 'sane' person would already have this if they had grown up with at least one responsible adult teaching them about life. It will always be frowned upon by some and will never be fully accepted as a mainstream entertainment simply because it is 'adult' and not suitable for children.
Page:
It tells people how to act properly in certain social situations.
Without porn, how would you know that the gas man coming around is a pefect opportunity to have the secks?
Without porn, when would you realise that everyone person everywhere, maybe just walking along, would like to come and have the secks with you?
Without porn how would you know that any two women, when left alone in the room, will always, without fail, have the secks?
You wouldn't.
Porn is educational.
Without porn, how would you know that the gas man coming around is a pefect opportunity to have the secks?
Without porn, when would you realise that everyone person everywhere, maybe just walking along, would like to come and have the secks with you?
Without porn how would you know that any two women, when left alone in the room, will always, without fail, have the secks?
You wouldn't.
Porn is educational.
CGJ wrote:
> Porn doesn't ruin society, I think it improves it.
In what way?
> Porn doesn't ruin society, I think it improves it.
In what way?
Porn doesn't ruin society, I think it improves it.
EL ® ö B ì Ñ wrote:
> Me like porn.
Correct
> Me like boobies.
Incorrect
> Me like the ladies.
Incorrect.
Come now, Ribbon, we all know you're little secret.
> Me like porn.
Correct
> Me like boobies.
Incorrect
> Me like the ladies.
Incorrect.
Come now, Ribbon, we all know you're little secret.
Me like porn.
Me like boobies.
Me like the ladies.
Me like boobies.
Me like the ladies.
Muuuuuh Booobbbiees
pb wrote:
>
> and still on the subject of Boobs, I believe Janet Jackson was merely
> trying to use hers to sell records. This beats trying to sell them
> based on her singing ability and will probably net her more records.
I find it quite sad that people would go out and buy her record just because she flashed a breast.
>
> and still on the subject of Boobs, I believe Janet Jackson was merely
> trying to use hers to sell records. This beats trying to sell them
> based on her singing ability and will probably net her more records.
I find it quite sad that people would go out and buy her record just because she flashed a breast.
Bishysmurph wrote:
> Porn is magic. It doesn't corrupt society!!!!
If Porn is magic - where does David Blaine fit into it all?
No, don't answer that...
and still on the subject of Boobs, I believe Janet Jackson was merely trying to use hers to sell records. This beats trying to sell them based on her singing ability and will probably net her more records.
> Porn is magic. It doesn't corrupt society!!!!
If Porn is magic - where does David Blaine fit into it all?
No, don't answer that...
and still on the subject of Boobs, I believe Janet Jackson was merely trying to use hers to sell records. This beats trying to sell them based on her singing ability and will probably net her more records.
Erm, no.
I have somewhat of a blurred view on porn…
Page: