The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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:
Bishysmurph wrote:
> Porn is magic. It doesn't corrupt society!!!!
Only if its dealt with responsibly.
> Porn is magic. It doesn't corrupt society!!!!
Only if its dealt with responsibly.
Porn is magic. It doesn't corrupt society!!!!
Meka Dragon wrote:
>
> There's somethibng very wrong with peoples body image if they think
> that we should be covered up the whole time, and seeing something as
> perfectly natural as a boob should be no big thing.
I agree Meka. I don't understand why people are so uptight about it, and I can't get over the way most Americans reacted to the Janet Jackson exposure. It was one breast for Gods sake. Flesh, thats all!
>
> There's somethibng very wrong with peoples body image if they think
> that we should be covered up the whole time, and seeing something as
> perfectly natural as a boob should be no big thing.
I agree Meka. I don't understand why people are so uptight about it, and I can't get over the way most Americans reacted to the Janet Jackson exposure. It was one breast for Gods sake. Flesh, thats all!
Very_Metal wrote:
> no.
>
> ill-educated people producing iller-educated offspring are what's
> ruining society.
>
> and no, "ill" or it's variants in this context do NOT mean
> something is good.
> honstly, i'm SOOOOOOO last week ;)
I agree.
It seems to me rather like stupid people breed more. Now that society takes special care to prevent morons removing thelselves from the gene pool before they can do any damage, we're devolving not evolving.
> no.
>
> ill-educated people producing iller-educated offspring are what's
> ruining society.
>
> and no, "ill" or it's variants in this context do NOT mean
> something is good.
> honstly, i'm SOOOOOOO last week ;)
I agree.
It seems to me rather like stupid people breed more. Now that society takes special care to prevent morons removing thelselves from the gene pool before they can do any damage, we're devolving not evolving.
no.
ill-educated people producing iller-educated offspring are what's ruining society.
and no, "ill" or it's variants in this context do NOT mean something is good.
honstly, i'm SOOOOOOO last week ;)
ill-educated people producing iller-educated offspring are what's ruining society.
and no, "ill" or it's variants in this context do NOT mean something is good.
honstly, i'm SOOOOOOO last week ;)
What shocked me this last week was seeing Janet Jackson's boob!
Now whilst you wouldn't call it porn as such, she was exposing herself (deliberately) on TV to millions of people. Actually, that in itself didn't shock me, it was the reaction to it. People in America are up in arms about the whole thing, even going as far as claiming for damages.
Now personally, I can't think of one person that should be damaged by seeing a boob. Incredibly young children would no doubt have seen their mother's boobs (and in some cases their fathers) countless times, and they wouldn't be bothered by it.
There's somethibng very wrong with peoples body image if they think that we should be covered up the whole time, and seeing something as perfectly natural as a boob should be no big thing.
Now whilst you wouldn't call it porn as such, she was exposing herself (deliberately) on TV to millions of people. Actually, that in itself didn't shock me, it was the reaction to it. People in America are up in arms about the whole thing, even going as far as claiming for damages.
Now personally, I can't think of one person that should be damaged by seeing a boob. Incredibly young children would no doubt have seen their mother's boobs (and in some cases their fathers) countless times, and they wouldn't be bothered by it.
There's somethibng very wrong with peoples body image if they think that we should be covered up the whole time, and seeing something as perfectly natural as a boob should be no big thing.
Porn has its place, and it's not on tv.
The titilating programmes on C4/C5 are nothing but elongated adverts for the top end of the porn industry, and the programmes that are generally spattered across the cable channels are just cheap and nasty ways of pulling in the viewers: why does GameNetwork (primarily a children's channel) transmogrify into wan k tv after 11pm? It's pathetic.
But is it lowering the standards of society?
It's a symptom of a decline, a decline into an anti-spiritual culture that is becoming ever-increasingly preoccupied with the shallow end of the pool.
The titilating programmes on C4/C5 are nothing but elongated adverts for the top end of the porn industry, and the programmes that are generally spattered across the cable channels are just cheap and nasty ways of pulling in the viewers: why does GameNetwork (primarily a children's channel) transmogrify into wan k tv after 11pm? It's pathetic.
But is it lowering the standards of society?
It's a symptom of a decline, a decline into an anti-spiritual culture that is becoming ever-increasingly preoccupied with the shallow end of the pool.
I think it does lower the standards of society, but I dont necessarily think thats a bad thing. What i dont really like seeing is how some stations like Sky One seem to be becoming obsessed with showing programmes that could be classed soft porn at increasingly early times. I dont think thats the way to go.
But that decadence is not a hundred miles away from certain practices of Romans or Greeks in days gone by, it is merely that we have more ways to view these acts now and society has changed and evolved over time, as have the views on what is right or wrong.
The point is that the boundaries of porn on TV or in the media even one or two decades ago has changed considerably over such a short time. Is it a good change or will it lower the standards of society as we see it?
The point is that the boundaries of porn on TV or in the media even one or two decades ago has changed considerably over such a short time. Is it a good change or will it lower the standards of society as we see it?
Black Glove wrote:
>
> On the other hand I wonder why young women (in particular) feel the
> need to perform every sexual act under the sun for a few hundred quid
> knowing that what is filmed will be splattered all over the internet
> till kingdom come.
I dare say some get a kick out of it. And there is always the people who see money as the be all and end all, no matter what they have to do to get it. We live in a greedy society these days.
>
> On the other hand I wonder why young women (in particular) feel the
> need to perform every sexual act under the sun for a few hundred quid
> knowing that what is filmed will be splattered all over the internet
> till kingdom come.
I dare say some get a kick out of it. And there is always the people who see money as the be all and end all, no matter what they have to do to get it. We live in a greedy society these days.
Page: