Friday, November 30, 2012
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
IN DEFENSE OR PORNOGRAPHY OR SO-CALLED PORNOGRAPHY: A COMMENTARY
In spite of our increasingly jaded and seemingly more permissive society, pornography or so-called pornography is still a hot button issue for some, including--but not limited to--right-wing politicians, so-called “Christian” fundamentalists and even left-wing--often radical--feminists. These entities have strived for years, decades even, to either totally eradicate pornography or so-called pornography or at least severely limit its distribution. However, with the advent of home video and especially the porn-saturated Internet, that’s becoming increasingly more and more difficult to do. Porn or so-called porn has been blamed for a whole slew of society’s ills, real or perceived, including--but not limited to--rape, child abuse and, my own personal favorite, so-called sex and/or porn addiction. These groups cite several supposed “studies” that supposedly show a definitive “link” between porn and these “ills” of society. Of course, these “studies” have often been “conducted” by those closely “affiliated” with these particular groups. Not to mention the fact that there have been an equal number of “studies” done that shows there is absolutely NO definite “link” between these problems and porn or so-called porn. For example, there was Kutchinsky’s landmark study in Denmark that was conducted back in 1973 that showed there was a significant drop in the number of sex crimes, including rape and child molestation, after the “legalization” of all types of pornography in that country. And then there’s a country like Japan, which consumes far more depraved and violent pornography than what is sometimes even “legally” allowed in this country, and their instances of sex crimes, including rape and child molestation, are almost nonexistent compared to America’s (and the same goes for violent crime in general). So, the question remains, why is that?
Many--or most--of the aforementioned groups cite serial killers like the infamous Ted Bundy, who infamously declared how “porn made me do it” to noted fundamentalist anti-porn zealot James C. Dobson the night before his richly-deserved execution, for their anti-porn stances. Never mind that fact that Ted Bundy was a psychopathic liar who blamed a whole slew of things on why he murdered all those women (including a young girl), including--but not limited to--detective magazines (not pornographic magazines), lack of sleep, the Devil and even on The Almighty as he reportedly told FBI profilers how killing all those women--including that young girl--made him feel like God. Plus, with the “adult” industry being a multi-billion dollar a year business in this country (reportedly making more money than sports and “mainstream” entertainment combined), it would make one think that there would be hundreds of thousands of Ted Bundy’s walking around murdering women--and children--all the time (at least that’s what the aforesaid right-wingers and their cohorts would have you believe). I know I myself have NEVER thought about harming a woman or a child or anyone else, for that matter, in spite of my porn viewing, for lack of a better word, habit.
Which brings me to my next point: The reason or one of the reasons why I “like” pornography or so-called pornography--besides, of course, the obvious!--is because there’s no bullshit involved in it as porn or so-called porn dispels all the “romantic” notions and “religious” myths we’ve built around sex and shows people fucking for the sake of fucking. Speaking of myths and notions surrounding the subject of porn or so-called porn, another argument against porn is how it’s supposedly “degrading” towards women and that women who choose to do porn were somehow molested or otherwise abused when they were younger. But I’ve noticed how that argument is rarely ever used against the men who star in porn films, that male porn stars are being “degraded” and how they were “abused” as children. In fact, male porn stars, unlike their female counterparts, are often looked up to. I mean, just look at the way the late John Holmes is still revered in spite of the fact that he had a horrendous personal life, e.g. dying of AIDS and his possibly being "involved" in a brutal murder, because he had a big wang and he got to make his "living" fucking beautiful women on-camera. This all goes back to the notion, spearheaded by “conservatives” and even their strange bedfellow allies in the so-called feminist movement, that “good girls” aren’t supposed to do things like star in porn movies so there must be something “wrong” with them either in their character--or lack thereof--or in their childhood. I’ve seen the blatant hypocrisy of this notion myself at various times; like, for instance, one guy I encountered on a social media site--I, of course, won’t say which one--constantly harped on me about my “liking” porn even though he himself had “liked” a couple of porn stars’s pages. Noted TV blowhard Dr. Phil once denounced ALL men who "looked" at porn on his show as being "sick & twisted & abnormal" and whatnot. Shortly thereafter, his eldest son married a former Playboy Playmate who not only appeared dropped & spread for Playboy but she also appeared "in ze buff" with her twin siblings--i.e. the Dahm Triplets--at the reported behest of their very own father. (Nope, nothing "sick & twisted & abnormal" about THAT!) Noted right-wing gasbag Bill O’Reilly--who himself had written a book where a drug-addicted teen prostitute gives oral sex to her pimp--once denounced then-porn star Jenna Jameson as a “slut” and a “whore” while he was interviewing her on his show on Fox (Non) News and then afterwards, according to Jenna (which Bill never denied doing, by the way), he actually “requested” some of her videos. Bullshitter Bill, in spite of his “request,” would later denounce Miss Jameson as a “quasi-prostitute” when she did a sneaker ad. (This was, of course, before he was caught on tape attempting to fuck one of his female employees in the shower with a falafel.)
Going back to the notion that porn is somehow "degrading" towards women and whatnot, according to statistics, about half (or more) of all people who consume pornography or so-called pornography on a regular basis are in fact women (although women call their porn "erotica"). The phenomenal success of the "erotic" book series 50 Shades Of Grey--not to mention Harlequin Blaze (which I affectionately refer to as Wal-Mart porn!)--is ample proof of that!
I, of course, understand that pornography or so-called pornography is not to everyone’s liking just like religion is likewise not to everyone’s liking (even though that doesn’t stop right-wing politicians and their allies in the “fundamentalist” crowd to try to shape our country’s laws on their own supposed religious beliefs--”gay” marriage and abortion, anyone?--and/or keep the Jehovah’s Witnesses from showing up at my damned door). I also find it rather interesting when these “religious” types always cite the Bible to likewise justify their anti-porn stances when the Bible is filled with lurid tales of rape, incest and even child slavery involving female virgin children. To paraphrase onetime Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart (reread my post “The Politics Of Porn“), pornography is definitely indeed in the eyes--or erections!--of the beholder! By the way, you want to know the "difference" between pornography and so-called erotica? Erotica uses a few more colorful euphemisms for the naughty parts!
Many--or most--of the aforementioned groups cite serial killers like the infamous Ted Bundy, who infamously declared how “porn made me do it” to noted fundamentalist anti-porn zealot James C. Dobson the night before his richly-deserved execution, for their anti-porn stances. Never mind that fact that Ted Bundy was a psychopathic liar who blamed a whole slew of things on why he murdered all those women (including a young girl), including--but not limited to--detective magazines (not pornographic magazines), lack of sleep, the Devil and even on The Almighty as he reportedly told FBI profilers how killing all those women--including that young girl--made him feel like God. Plus, with the “adult” industry being a multi-billion dollar a year business in this country (reportedly making more money than sports and “mainstream” entertainment combined), it would make one think that there would be hundreds of thousands of Ted Bundy’s walking around murdering women--and children--all the time (at least that’s what the aforesaid right-wingers and their cohorts would have you believe). I know I myself have NEVER thought about harming a woman or a child or anyone else, for that matter, in spite of my porn viewing, for lack of a better word, habit.
Which brings me to my next point: The reason or one of the reasons why I “like” pornography or so-called pornography--besides, of course, the obvious!--is because there’s no bullshit involved in it as porn or so-called porn dispels all the “romantic” notions and “religious” myths we’ve built around sex and shows people fucking for the sake of fucking. Speaking of myths and notions surrounding the subject of porn or so-called porn, another argument against porn is how it’s supposedly “degrading” towards women and that women who choose to do porn were somehow molested or otherwise abused when they were younger. But I’ve noticed how that argument is rarely ever used against the men who star in porn films, that male porn stars are being “degraded” and how they were “abused” as children. In fact, male porn stars, unlike their female counterparts, are often looked up to. I mean, just look at the way the late John Holmes is still revered in spite of the fact that he had a horrendous personal life, e.g. dying of AIDS and his possibly being "involved" in a brutal murder, because he had a big wang and he got to make his "living" fucking beautiful women on-camera. This all goes back to the notion, spearheaded by “conservatives” and even their strange bedfellow allies in the so-called feminist movement, that “good girls” aren’t supposed to do things like star in porn movies so there must be something “wrong” with them either in their character--or lack thereof--or in their childhood. I’ve seen the blatant hypocrisy of this notion myself at various times; like, for instance, one guy I encountered on a social media site--I, of course, won’t say which one--constantly harped on me about my “liking” porn even though he himself had “liked” a couple of porn stars’s pages. Noted TV blowhard Dr. Phil once denounced ALL men who "looked" at porn on his show as being "sick & twisted & abnormal" and whatnot. Shortly thereafter, his eldest son married a former Playboy Playmate who not only appeared dropped & spread for Playboy but she also appeared "in ze buff" with her twin siblings--i.e. the Dahm Triplets--at the reported behest of their very own father. (Nope, nothing "sick & twisted & abnormal" about THAT!) Noted right-wing gasbag Bill O’Reilly--who himself had written a book where a drug-addicted teen prostitute gives oral sex to her pimp--once denounced then-porn star Jenna Jameson as a “slut” and a “whore” while he was interviewing her on his show on Fox (Non) News and then afterwards, according to Jenna (which Bill never denied doing, by the way), he actually “requested” some of her videos. Bullshitter Bill, in spite of his “request,” would later denounce Miss Jameson as a “quasi-prostitute” when she did a sneaker ad. (This was, of course, before he was caught on tape attempting to fuck one of his female employees in the shower with a falafel.)
Going back to the notion that porn is somehow "degrading" towards women and whatnot, according to statistics, about half (or more) of all people who consume pornography or so-called pornography on a regular basis are in fact women (although women call their porn "erotica"). The phenomenal success of the "erotic" book series 50 Shades Of Grey--not to mention Harlequin Blaze (which I affectionately refer to as Wal-Mart porn!)--is ample proof of that!
I, of course, understand that pornography or so-called pornography is not to everyone’s liking just like religion is likewise not to everyone’s liking (even though that doesn’t stop right-wing politicians and their allies in the “fundamentalist” crowd to try to shape our country’s laws on their own supposed religious beliefs--”gay” marriage and abortion, anyone?--and/or keep the Jehovah’s Witnesses from showing up at my damned door). I also find it rather interesting when these “religious” types always cite the Bible to likewise justify their anti-porn stances when the Bible is filled with lurid tales of rape, incest and even child slavery involving female virgin children. To paraphrase onetime Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart (reread my post “The Politics Of Porn“), pornography is definitely indeed in the eyes--or erections!--of the beholder! By the way, you want to know the "difference" between pornography and so-called erotica? Erotica uses a few more colorful euphemisms for the naughty parts!
Friday, November 16, 2012
Sunday, November 11, 2012
Saturday, November 10, 2012
Ariel Rebel - Sexy Bedtime at AmateurIndex.com
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
THE UNDEFEATED vs. WHO'S NAILIN' PAYLIN?
Hmmmm, which movie do I prefer, uh-hum, watching? The bloviating (so-called) documentary about Sarah Palin . . . or the hardcore "adult" film starring the ultra hot Lisa Ann as the "half-governor" of Alaska and Fox (Non) News blowhard and all-around (fill in the blank for yourself!)? Gee, that sure is a toughie, isn't it?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)