Socialism and pornography

[Dr Mindbender]

I know this subject has probably been brought up x number of times but Id like to get a perspective from other marxists. Are there ever any circumstances where pornography can be considered non-exploitive? For example, exhibitionist couples who wish to film themselves for the entertainment of others. Also there is the argument that people who are voyeurs have a right to watch other people have sex, if it is to fulfill a particular lust.
Anyone else's views?

[patrickbeverley]

I'm quite ambivalent on this issue. I don't have any of the puritanical moral values that might make me consider pornography to be "immoral" or "dirty" - I wouldn't, for example, think less of someone if I knew they enjoyed having sex with other people watching. But in the broader sense that pornography promotes an unobtainable image for people (especially women) to conform to and thus reduces people's self-esteem or self-respect, I do have a grievance with it.

On a personal level, I find it boring and not much of a turn-on.

[Orange Juche]

Originally posted by Ulster [email protected] 22 2006, 11:00 PM
I know this subject has probably been brought up x number of times but Id like to get a perspective from other marxists. Are there ever any circumstances where pornography can be considered non-exploitive? For example, exhibitionist couples who wish to film themselves for the entertainment of others. Also there is the argument that people who are voyeurs have a right to watch other people have sex, if it is to fulfill a particular lust.
Anyone else's views?
I would argue that yes, there are circumstances where it could be considered non-exploitive.

Although, the vast majority I've seen is. To be honest, when I watch alot of it, I always get this kind of bad feeling in the back of my mind... alot of it is women projecting themselves as saying "fuck me, this is all I'm good for." That gets to me.

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by MeetingPeopleIsEasy+Apr 23 2006, 09:19 PM--> (MeetingPeopleIsEasy @ Apr 23 2006, 09:19 PM)
Ulster [email protected] 22 2006, 11:00 PM
I know this subject has probably been brought up x number of times but Id like to get a perspective from other marxists. Are there ever any circumstances where pornography can be considered non-exploitive? For example, exhibitionist couples who wish to film themselves for the entertainment of others. Also there is the argument that people who are voyeurs have a right to watch other people have sex, if it is to fulfill a particular lust.
Anyone else's views?
I would argue that yes, there are circumstances where it could be considered non-exploitive.

Although, the vast majority I've seen is. To be honest, when I watch alot of it, I always get this kind of bad feeling in the back of my mind... alot of it is women projecting themselves as saying "fuck me, this is all I'm good for." That gets to me. [/b]
Would pornography be 'illegal' in a socialist society? i think theres wide philosophical issues at stake, for example does the state have the right to deprive exhibitionists of their right to use recorded media to excercise their lusts?
Also, I think banning such activities outright as with drugs, alcohol etc is counterproductive as it only drives such industries underground and adds weight to the 'big brother state' argument of the reactionaries. Im in 2 minds about the issue. While Im against the sexist side of it (ie corrupt porn barons luring young girls with financial incentives) I have no objective to (and quite frankly enjoy)watching other adults within the confines of a respectful relationship. Furthermore some of these people want to be watched! Who is to say thats wrong?

[RebelDog]

Pornography can as we all know be an extreme form of exploitation and cruelty, ie; child pornography. Whilst I abore those who are involved in such sickness I know that it has nothing to do with consenting adults doing what they want to do. I believe that if we want to be free ourselves then we cannot tell adults what to do sexualy. But I will always believe in terrible retribution for pedophiles, they are disgusting bastards.

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by The [email protected] 23 2006, 11:30 PM
Pornography can as we all know be an extreme form of exploitation and cruelty, ie; child pornography. Whilst I abore those who are involved in such sickness I know that it has nothing to do with consenting adults doing what they want to do. I believe that if we want to be free ourselves then we cannot tell adults what to do sexualy. But I will always believe in terrible retribution for pedophiles, they are disgusting bastards.
lol who mentioned paedophilla?! Paedophilia is a grey area that divides the left however its not really relevant to this thread .Also there is another aspect I havent touched on, homosexual pornography. Surely when 2 men are involved there can be no suggestion of sexist undertones? Or lesbian pornography produced by a female filmaker for that matter?

[Cheung Mo]

Pedophilia should not fucking divide the left. Anybody who is not yet a teenager lacks the self-realisation and the intellectual faculties needed to consent to sexual activity: Sexually exploiting such people is no different from gender exploitation, wage slavery, or conventional slavery. That being said, not everybody is able to develop the aforementioned intellectual faculties and self-realisation at the same time, which makes it extremely difficult to determine what level of permmisiveness opens the door to exploitation too widely and what level of puritanism becomes too repressive for both individuals and society as a whole (Of course, some issues are obvious: Two 15-year-olds having their first roll in the hay can rarely be called exploitative, and stuff like sexual equality among men and women and full sexual and social rights for all regardless of sexual orientation is absolutely necessary in a free and egalitarian society.). A lot of this difficulty is caused directly by the fact that absurd sexual taboos have created a world in which we are literally fucking like rabbits (Although it took us millennia to actually admit that we were doing it. :-P) in spite of having barely scratched the surface of human sexuality from an intellectual, a psychological, a philosophical, a moral, or a humanistic perspective.

[Dr Mindbender]

Originally posted by Cheung [email protected] 24 2006, 04:58 AM
Pedophilia should not fucking divide the left. Anybody who is not yet a teenager lacks the self-realisation and the intellectual faculties needed to consent to sexual activity: Sexually exploiting such people is no different from gender exploitation, wage slavery, or conventional slavery. That being said, not everybody is able to develop the aforementioned intellectual faculties and self-realisation at the same time, which makes it extremely difficult to determine what level of permmisiveness opens the door to exploitation too widely and what level of puritanism becomes too repressive for both individuals and society as a whole (Of course, some issues are obvious: Two 15-year-olds having their first roll in the hay can rarely be called exploitative, and stuff like sexual equality among men and women and full sexual and social rights for all regardless of sexual orientation is absolutely necessary in a free and egalitarian society.). A lot of this difficulty is caused directly by the fact that absurd sexual taboos have created a world in which we are literally fucking like rabbits (Although it took us millennia to actually admit that we were doing it. :-P) in spite of having barely scratched the surface of human sexuality from an intellectual, a psychological, a philosophical, a moral, or a humanistic perspective.
when i said it divided the left, i wasnt arguing that some socialists condone or even practise paedophillia. What I meant was that many believe the way to prevent it is to tackle the social issues within individuals which cause peadophillia, as opposed to granting the courts and police unnecessary or excessive means of deterrence which do nothing to solve the root problem. Paedophillia in my opinion is a mental illness which should be treated as such. The sick shouldnt be criminalised.

[Cheung Mo]

In my opinion, pedophilia is a dangerous enough mental illness to society that those who suffer from it severely enough to act upon it need institutionalisation until they recover. (Understand that this is not a life sentence: Approaching pedophilia as a mental illness will allow us to assess it rationally rather than emotionally, thus facilitating research on psychiatric treatments and drugs that can cure or completely suppress it.)

That being said, I oppose any sort of castration (A punishment suggested by many law-and-order types for pedophiles.): Humans are too falliable for irreversible punishments to be just. So when I say things like "I support the mass execution of the Royal Nepal Army," I am acting out of anger and frustration. Strictly speaking, I do not have a problem with the fact that execution kills (When it comes to things like the RNA, Nazi war criminals, or those Jamaican mobs who lynch homosexuals because Pas(s)tor Fundiefucktard or some worthless reggae star told them to, I certainly believe that the fuckers don't deserve to be among the living wasting oxygen and contributing to the overpopulation crisis. Those who inflict that level of oppression among the innocent have been stripped -- in my mind -- of their humanity and all of the rights and privileges that go along.): I merely have a problem with irreversibly punishing innocent women and men no matter how evil or how well-proven their alleged crimes may be.

[Comrade Marcel]

Here's the thread I remember...

http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php...=ST&f=8&t=26880 (http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?act=ST&f=8&t=26880)