[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / edu / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ wiki / twitter / cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"The anons of the past have only shitposted on the Internet about the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it."
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon
leftypol archives


File: 1717648235882.jpg (943.29 KB, 2498x1602, fm2m2ui6vcf61.jpg)

 [Last 50 Posts]

"The Pornography Question"

I've been doing off and on research into what I call "The Pornography Question". Let's define pornography as explicit material, sexual in nature, created by one or more consented adults, for the consumption by adults. Basically, is it compatible with communism? Is it inherently anti-women? Is it inherently unethical? A sign of capitalist decay?

Prior to this I had a fairly negative outlook on the medium as a whole, mostly stereotypes. Mostly insofar as, assuming the overwhelming majority of women are not willingly be in the industry, either they've been coherced, trafficked or had to for the money, and thus, consuming the material is inherently harmful to women. But at the same time, I've dated a couple of Sex Workers, I've dated a dancer/softcore model and an onlyfans creator. The onlyfans creator said it was a way to empower herself, she said it was far less degrading that working as a waitress, I believe it. I never cared in either case, it's a job, get the bag, it ain't tricking if you've got it. Of course both of these relationships were before I was really a commie, so I lacked the more systemic understanding of how neoliberalism works to commodify the personal. And, admittingly, the stereotypes still played a role in the acceptance of my ex's work, ie "Something must have happened in her past to cause her to do this but I don't care that she does it".

A former friend, whom is a 36 year old former model (remember Suicidegirls?), lamented about not being able to model anymore because she was worried about the *stigma* and how it might reflect on her as a professional, career wise. She was very proud of her past career. In fact, her upbringing was very strict, with Christian gender roles and a traditionalist worldview. The same type of culture that created incredibly creepy events like Purity Balls, the same culture that normalizes treating women as objects to be traded between men. That sort of southern Christian culture that I've long rallied against. It's these personal contradictions that prompted further critical introspection into the medium as well as my own ingrained opinions on it.

Almost every study I read completely ignored or outright handwaved gay and queer porn, and this to me presents an issue. How can you handwave a significant part of a medium and then say the entire medium is bad? If someone made the argument that horror movies are degenerate bourgeoisie decadence, but only used films like Saw and Hostel as examples, that would be pretty disingenuous no? So I started reading interviews with queer people who work in the industry. 1/2 Very common sentiment was that this medium provided a space for them to express their queerness in ways they might otherwise not be able to. So, many of the earlier, more anti-pornography SWERFs and studies straight up ignored queer people, and when we do see the perspective, it's basically the opposite of the assumed one.

One issue I had with Dworkin's arguments is that she lacks a material basis for her claims, while also using a fairly narrow definition of pornography that's not really accepted by the mainstream society has a whole. She defines pornography as a medium that is inherently showcasing acts of violence against women, and then uses this definition to showcase how porn contributes to the mass normalization of a patriarchal society. Which is to say, she draws a distinction between pornography and erotica in such a way, that few others who aren't also SWERFs do. By their own definition many Onlyfans creators would not be creating pornography but erotica, because their definition of pornography requires some act to be done to a woman (rarely if ever does she mention queer people). Dworkin and her contemporaries, such as MacKinnon, distinguished between pornography and erotica based on the presence of violence and degradation. Erotica, in their view, is consensual and non-degrading sexual expression, whereas pornography inherently involves the subjugation and objectification of women. However, the overwhelming majority of people do not make this narrow distinction. This, fundamentally, is leads to issues because we're working with two definitions here.

The crux of Dworkin's argument is that pornography is a manifestation of the misogyny embedded in patriarchal society, how can this be true, if those same patriarchal forces are directly responsible for the repression and censorship of pornographic materials? Further, how can this be true if, as mentioned later we look at pre-Christian societies, and how sex was depicted in a much more open sense in a variety of cases? Further, how does this account for gay porn? Trans porn? Queer porn? Consider a typical pornographic scenerio, a slender woman is rough, passionate sex with two large, fit men. Their faces are obscured, and she's centered in the film's composition. This is, by Dworkin's definition absolutely pornography, and thus a manifestation of our patriarchal society. Now, consider the same scenario without a woman involved. A slender twink is having rough sex by two fit men. Does this evoke the same reaction inherent "wrongness" in relation to a patriarchial society, or does it evoke the inherentness of male sexuality, something we've been trained culturally to accept? Is it that our culture continues to subliminally and consciously acknowledge female sexuality as inherently innate?

You know, I've been told that you can't be pro-communist and be, you know, pro-pornography, because it's inherently anti-women, right? To be honest, the idea that there's no way a woman could want to have or participate in such activities, but if it's a man or a queer person, or gay porn or whatever, then it's different, that to me seems like inherently misogystic contradition to posit. Especially when we consider the root of this obsession with controlling the sexuality of people, namely working class people, is rooted in 17th-18th century English aristocracy. In fact, the first law that criminalized pornography was the English Obscene Publications Act 1857, and to this day, any depiction of female ejaculation in pornography is completely banned in the UK.

Soon after, similar laws spread across much of the other imperial nations of the time, America's 1865 Comstock Act (which also sought to control abortion and contraceptives), as well as Tsarist Russia, with the anti-pornography laws on the books in the USSR being inhereted from this era. We can look at former Eastern block states like East Germany and Yugoslavia for much more lax laws on the material as well. Going further back now. We can see in various pre-AD societies, that sexual expression was much different than it is in our current, western culture. From trans priestesses in Sumeria, to ancient Nubian and Cretan matriarchial societies, as well as the Japanese tradition of Shuga, among countless other examples, it's clear our society's sexual culture is not innate to the human experience itself. A historical material analysis shows us this.

We see that the rise of industrialization, and indeed the earliest stages of capitalism saw the rise of these anti-pornography censorship laws. In some places, even the mere act of masturbation was deemed obscene, causing mental illness. As the working class formed during this urbanization, industrialization period, these laws and cultural stances served as a means of controlling the working class further. Workers lived closely, often in flop houses and other packed, cramped buildings. Company towns were not uncommon. Your boss is your neighbor, and your boss is the mayor, and these additional layers of control served as a means to both pacify and create a culture of shame around the sexual nature humans inately have, these layers of control are a central means in which the capitalist class normalizes and diffuses a layer of anxiety that allows for the boss, the manager, the overseer, to enact further control over the working classes.

How can the argument that pornography, as a medium, is inherently a manifestation of the patriachy, if the root cause of the patriarchy, according to a Marxist feminist view, is capitalism, and we know that, during the rise of capitalism and industrialization, the culture of sexual shame and censorship was made manifest via various laws in-acted by the capitalist class to control the proletariat? Further, how can one reduce the medium to it's most obscene interactions, and then judge it on those merits alone? And finally, if those obscene interactions are done consentually, then is to judge them as inherently patriachial not, ironically, re-inforcing the patriarchal denial of women as innately sexual beings, while re-inforcing the ideal that men, innately are? We would not scoff at a man who responds to "Why did you become a porn star?" with "Because I like sex." but, the same response from a woman in our current societal framework would, for most, evoke a different reaction.

There are issues, but these issues are worker's issues. Safety, consent, trafficking, sexual harassment. Many of these issues are bought up as a way to paint pornography as inherently maleficant but, other industries are plagued with them as well. Trafficking for example, is very common for hotel house keeping services, typically women as well. Sexual harrassment from customers and co-workers plagues various industries, including tech, think about the treatment of women at game companies like Blizzard for example.

My ex, as mentioned above, was pretty open that she liked to get off, and that she felt more degraded as a waitress than selling videos online. When one asks female performers, aside from workers issues stated above, they mention the stigma. The lack of career options after they exit the industry, the social stigma, the scarlet letter that performing in porn brings upon them. Does this not reflect the same psychological control mechanisms mentioned above? If pornography is, as some of my contemporaries have put, "the peak of neoliberalism", why then, do major payment systems like Visa, Mastercard, Cashapp, Paypal, etc shutdown sex work and pornographic content creators so often?

It's for these reasons that I have to conclude that pornography, as defined in the introduction, is not inherently anti-woman, nor is it inherently bad. Like video games, or film, or music, pornography is a medium of expression, in it's case, sexual expression. Could it be that it's the very deeply ingrained sexual culture created over the last 200 years of industrialization that's the issue? Someone spends an hour playing a highly realistic simulation of war, these games are highly popular, played primarily by young men and the development of these games are often funded, in part, by the US Department of Defense. We don't have any level of shame built around these simulations of violence, yet, they often lead enlistments, to real death, real trauma. One must ask, why is sexuality shamed and admonished, but violence celebrated?

 

This thread is doomed to be a cesspit because leftypol is a retarded bunch of moralizers who think "after the revolution" they get some mandate to impose their arbitrary morality on everybody.

 

the moralfaggotry question

 

look, you let people see some whore's ankles and they start craving ever more extreme material, like calves, then knees, and god knows what else

 

Think about the women. 🌎
Think about the children. 🌍
Ban abortion porn. 😔 👎

 

I think anti-porn might be like anti-circumcision in that it's probably the correct position to have, but the people who are anti-porn are also insane, like religious whackjobs and "watching porn will sapp your male energy." Just the most insufferable and weird people who don't have normal reasons to dislike porn.

 

>>1877873
I know you didn't say handholding but you were thinking it.

 

>>1877884
And that doesn't cause any introspection on your part does it?

 

What is the best type of porn?

 

>>1877890
Furry post-vore

 

Drawn stuff and following your friends' after dark accounts. Remove profit incentive and sex work is replaced by mutual gooning and casual sex. Destroy the bourgeois superstructure and the People's Polycule of Earth will eradicate incelism.

 

>>1877891
so like cropophilia right

 

>>1877892
>sex work
Fuck you.

 

>The crux of Dworkin's argument is that pornography is a manifestation of the misogyny embedded in patriarchal society, how can this be true, if those same patriarchal forces are directly responsible for the repression and censorship of pornographic materials?

they're hypocrites?

 

>>1877884
It will sap your male energy tho

 

>>1877888
Anti-porn is more defensible as a position to me if it's reasoned that porn doesn't respect the humanity of the people involved but that's also related to how it's produced and consumed if anything. A form of exploitation. I wouldn't even phrase it as a "anti-woman" thing because there's plenty of porn that has no women at all. The concept of sex on film doesn't seem "immoral" though.

 

File: 1717649905295.jpg (25.89 KB, 414x514, hornyyy.jpg)

>>1877892

I SUPPOR THE 5 YEAR GOONING PLAN

GLORY TO THE PEOPLE'S POLYCULE OF EARTH

URRAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH

 

>>1877884
What point is there in standing in the way of people exchanging their own erotic art as part of the general intellect?

 

>>1877902
Don't think there is one really

 

>>1877903
well if gay nazi says it then it must be true

 

File: 1717650229897.jpg (690.51 KB, 1079x1465, 1717635373877.jpg)

This convo was in /USPOL/
Remote Amazon tribe finally connects to internet — only to wind up hooked on porn, social media
>“But now, things have gotten worse. Young people have gotten lazy because of the internet, they’re learning the ways of the white people.”
>Alfredo said many young Marubo men have been sharing porn videos in group chats and he has already observed more “aggressive sexual behavior” in some of them.
https://nypost.com/2024/06/04/lifestyle/remote-amazon-tribe-connects-to-elon-musks-starlink-internet-service-become-hooked-on-porn-social-media/

 

Porn gave us BBC which makes /pol/ furious. The BBC is the finest weapon in the anti-fascist arsenal.

 

>>1877908
>he said she said
Where's a proper study? Where's the methodology?

 

File: 1717650342064.jpg (50.31 KB, 276x280, 1437722072921.jpg)

A much more interesting and useful question to ask is what is the basis for opposition to pornography in practice? Cui bono? What are the justifications, and on what are they based? What does the movement against pornography look like, and what are its actual consequences? The questions about pornography itself are pretty banal and obvious.

>Basically, is it compatible with communism?

Sexually explicit media is something people want, obviously. There's no reason that would be different under communism. The conditions in which it is produces would be different to say the least.
>Is it inherently anti-women?
A lot of porn has nothing to do with women at all (gay porn).
>Is it inherently unethical?
Any question of "is X ethical" depends on what ethics you mean. Some of the available options will define it as unethical by fiat. In others, it's ethical under certain conditions. In others still, it's always ethical (i.e. "anything that feels good is good").
>A sign of capitalist decay?
People were making sexually explicit art since before capitalism, and if we had developed photography and video under some other system, people would have made pornography under those systems.

>Like video games, or film, or music, pornography is a medium of expression, in it's case, sexual expression.

No, it's a subject to be captured or portrayed (sexuality) and a response to be provoked in the viewer (arousal). It can be done in any medium, from film to cave painting to perfume, at least in theory.

 

>>1877903
It turns out the market has done a lot of damage to femdom as well, according to sociologist Julie Fennell:

<Although kink culture usually distinguishes between dominance (control) and sadism (psychological and physical cruelty), some sadistic behaviors are generally expected from dominants, and these expected cruelties are perhaps the most at odds with conventional expectations of femininity. Thus it’s not really surprising that my survey statistics and observations both suggest that feminine dominants are virtually non-existent outside the public Scene with one very important exception: professional dominants (also called “pro doms,” “pro dommes,” and “dominatrices”). Pro doms are paid by clients to control, hurt, humiliate, and manipulate them. Their work was extensively profiled in sociologist Danielle Lindemann’s book Dominatrix (2012). Although I have personally known and interviewed several male pro doms, the vast majority of pro doms are women,10 and regardless of the pro dom’s gender, almost all of their clients are men.2 My survey statistics suggest that pro doms exist in large part because, outside the Scene, there are still men who want to be dominated by women, but almost no women who say they want to dominate (anyone).


<The result of this kinky demographic quirk is that even though pro doms (who are ultimately doing what they do to get paid, even if they enjoy their jobs) and femdoms (who are presumably doing what they do just because they enjoy it) are notionally quite distinct, in reality the lines between them rapidly blur. Pro doms end up exerting tremendous influence over the social construction of femdom, both in popular and kinky imagination—and in actual practice. This occurs because: 1. My interviews indicate that many of the male submissives who expect to partner with femdoms are introduced to BDSM through pro doms, 2. My inter- views also show that porn is one of the main ways that people are introduced to femdom and most “femdom” pornography hires pro doms to work it, thus shaping the way men and women both expect femdoms to act and dress, 3. As implied in Billions, many femdoms take classes from pro doms to learn how to be dominants, 4. Many femdoms have worked as pro doms at least part time because it can be a relatively quick and easy way to earn money doing something they enjoy that few people have the skills or inclination to do, and 5. There are few non-professional role models for women who want to be dominants. In the end, I like to half-joke that the main difference between a pro dom and a femdom is that if you want to keep seeing a pro dom, you usually have to keep paying her and not piss her off, but if you want to keep seeing a femdom, you usually have to actively make her happy. Moreover, femdoms are often seeking romantic relationships with subs which the client dynamic of pro doms would obviously make very awkward.


<It’s difficult to exaggerate how problematic this for-profit reality is for both men and women seeking femdom relationship dynamics. Pro doms have to keep their clients happy in order to ensure they have repeat customers, and that often means doing things that the client wants, whereas Scene doms of any gender generally expect to do things much more based on what they themselves enjoy. Relatedly, many male “fetishists”—people who have very specific usually non-sexual desires that arouse them—often pay pro doms to indulge their fetishes. Since those men were used to going to pro doms, the Scene frequently declares them to be “submissives” and expects them to partner with dominants, regardless of whether there is anything conventionally submissive about their fetishes. Many femdoms and would-be femdoms complain that they don’t perceive anything particularly submissive about these men, and that their potential male partner pool in the Scene isn’t very appealing as a result. Moreover, pro doms often dress in expensive, elaborate, and uncomfortable costumes (and perform that way in porn), leading to a perceived expectation that femdoms will do likewise, and that costuming is part of the performative role of femdoms. Pro doms also tend to focus on viciously cruel humiliation and degradation, which many women interested in dominance say holds little to no appeal for them. Pro doms tend to project an “ice queen” image that isn’t terribly conducive to sustainable relationships and that many women say feels incompatible with what they want from relationships, and incompatible with their own identities.

 


 

>>1877909
BBC has been a thing since slavery when white men were concerned about the well endowed African and the pure white women. This has been an obsession for half a millennia

 

>>1877910
yes we communists will take the word of the NY Post

 

>>1877914
Yeah but you couldn't just post a pic of a white woman sucking BBC to make them lose their shit.

 

>>>1877912

damn bruh tfw no femdom gf

 

File: 1717650692817.png (118.71 KB, 605x336, ClipboardImage.png)

>>1877914
They burned down a Black newspaper for suggesting that a white woman might desire sex with a Black man of her own free will.

 

>>1877909
go away shay

 

>>1877908
PORN SUCKED OUT THEIR MAN JUICES AND NOW THEY ARE LAZY AND DEPRESSED AND GOING TO DIE OF HUNGER BECAUSE THE ADDICTION TO PORN IS STRONGER THAN THE SURVIVAL INSTINCT.

 

>>1877884
>anti-circumcision people
>insane whackjobs
>insufferable and weird
Yeah, so crazy to be against mutilating babies.
The people who don't have strong feelings about this are the normal ones, and you're not weird at all for bringing it up apropos of nothing. It's also very reasonable and not completely backwards to compare intactivists to religious fanatics, who are generally the ones doing genital mutilation and defending it.

Polite sage for off-topic.

 

>>1877922
Is there anything more cringe than white rage? Grow bigger dicks white dudes.

 

>>1877853
>is rooted in 17th-18th century English aristocracy
The Puritans had started the project of reforming society by reforming its manners, and started by attacking popular entertainments that enabled departure from their ideals (materialist, but nonetheless retarded). As commerce becomes less important, manners (including particularly sexual manners) might be expected to follow suit.

 

>>1877908
>North Korea was right kek

 

>>1877932
I didn't read that anon calling intactivists insane, only the Christian anti-porn activists, who, for complex and unspoken reasons, actually end up on the pro-circ side.

 

>>1877937
>I didn't read that anon calling intactivists insane, only the Christian anti-porn activists
I considered that, but IDK what the point of the comparison is if it's just that they're both "the correct position" because you could pick a million other things for that comparison.
"Intactivists are crazy tho" is a very common whataboutism among people who are uncomfortable hearing about the subject and just want people to stop talking about it.

 

>>1877934
some mayos arent build for being the only white dude at the orgy

 

>>1877940
>"Intactivists are crazy tho" is a very common whataboutism among people who are uncomfortable hearing about the subject and just want people to stop talking about it.

I can't stand civility politics

 

>>1877853
Historical materialism? On my /leftypol/? More likely than you think!

 

>>1877914
Book of Ezekiel in the bible has some BBC fetish goon stories.
>>1877853
I think HC with human actors should probably be banned.

 

>>1877898
Well no, what we refer to as "hypocrisy" is actually called dialectical contradictions.

 

File: 1717652606727.png (768.12 KB, 1026x1132, mto4ghgswqi81.png)

>>1877912
This whole thing has the vibes of the old Greco-Roman dom/sub idea.
I wonder what the proportion of straight/gay/bi is among sub men vs the general population. Maybe for them it's more about the power imbalance than the gender. It's not like they're paying to get topped by a woman, right?

I wonder if the imbalance has more to do with how men are socialized to care about dominance or more to do with how women are socialized to try to get along better. It's not like women don't have their own social hierarchies, but it's interesting that it's particularly rare for them to want to bring that sort of dynamic into sex the way a lot of men do (at least on the dom side).

>>1877922
>>1877934
>>1877942
It's not even a white vs non white thing. It's an anglo thing. Picrel.

 

File: 1717653645241.jpg (22.91 KB, 600x524, FQzFTSnX0AQ-89X.jpg)

>there won't be any sex work under communism because there won't be any work

 

>>1877932
You're basically demonstrating his point live. A metric fuckton of anti-circumcision activists seem to be weirdos with sexual hangups who decide to blame everything on their parents letting them get circumcised and will literally not shut the fuck up about it.

 

>>1877963
>and will literally not shut the fuck up about it.
Why don't you shut up about it since that is not what the thread is about?

 

File: 1717655783499-0.png (8.63 MB, 3000x2311, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1717655783499-1.png (228.56 KB, 500x462, ClipboardImage.png)

File: 1717655783499-2.png (317.5 KB, 477x565, ClipboardImage.png)

>>1877853
> how can this be true if, as mentioned later we look at pre-Christian societies, and how sex was depicted in a much more open sense in a variety of cases?
one thing that's almost never mentioned is how sex wasn't really THAT taboo even in Christian society. It certainly had its time and place but it was there. look at phallic and vaginal brooch pins from medieval pilgrimage festivals. Medieval peasants basically worked 150 days a year and spent the rest of the year getting drunk at pilgrimage festivals, cheating on their spouses, etc.

 

>>1877957
Prostitution can't exist under a moneyless society you turd.

 

>>1877932
>OMGGGGGGGGG THIS IS LITERALLY MUTILATIONNNNNN
Why are Americans so hyperbolic? It's a stupid religious tradition, don't compare it to maiming children.

 

File: 1717656021092.png (111.6 KB, 496x876, A B C D value forms.png)

>>1877973
>anon forgets there are value forms other than money

 

>>1877940
All activism has nothing to do with communism. How does, in this case, whining about the "evils" of fucking pornography (lmao) further strictly proletarian association? Get fucking real.

 

>>1877975
>communism is when bartering
Shut the fuck up please.

 

>>1877975
cool dude you posted a page from marx yet claim there will be commodities under communism XD

 

>>1877974
as someone who was circumcised. Yes. I consider it genital mutilation. I did not consent to it. In fact I had it done to me at an age where I actually remember it. Age 5. Most have it done when they are babies and don't remember it. Basically my mom was Gen X and didn't want me circumcised, but my boomer grandma who was OK with circumcision took custody of me. When I was 5 a doctor gave me a physical and determined that my glans was "adhering unnaturally to my foreskin" and he convinced her to get me circumcised. I'm sure he was interested in a payday or something. I got circumcised at 5. It was extremely painful. My penis scabs stuck to my shorts in kindergarten and I had to carry around a barber's spray bottle to wet the scabs and fix it so I could pee properly. I had no idea why it happened to me. The idea that it came to America as a form of masturbation discouragement recommended by the quack Dr. Kellog is even more evidence that it is a reactionary and ideologically charged non-medical procedure. It didn't stop me from masturbating btw.

 

File: 1717656339266.png (165.32 KB, 640x487, ClipboardImage.png)

>>1877977
>>1877978
not the same anon, was just making a stupid joke. i'm not really that invested

 

>>1877980
thats a relief actually, youre fine

 

>>1877979
>a minimal medical surgery is literally mutilation
Groan.

 

>>1877981
i will let you hit my back walls for 20 yards of linen

 

>>1877982
it's not medical

 

> Is it inherently anti-women?
I find this line of thinking sexist nonsense. It assumes that women are pure sexkess beings with no interest in fucking whatsover at best, and some kind of deities able to obtain sex on command at worst

 

>>1877853
>if the root cause of the patriarchy, according to a Marxist feminist view, is capitalism
What? Read origins of the family. Capitalism destroys the patriarchy because it lets and forces most women to work outside the household.
I ultimately agree with the post, but you are still being a liberal while saying it. Most points here - both ones you agree with and ones you disagree with - seem to be liberal bullshit.
>and thus, consuming the material is inherently harmful to women
GTFO with your moralism, you do not support anyone for any content if you torrent and use adblockers (as you should)
>How can you handwave a significant part of a medium and then say the entire medium is bad?
Holy shit, this framing is so childish
>She defines pornography as a medium that is inherently showcasing acts of violence against women, and then uses this definition to showcase how porn contributes to the mass normalization of a patriarchal society.
This sounds like some fucking dumb liberal bullshit, especially considering the fact that the patriarchy is mostly dead.
>Very common sentiment was that this medium provided a space for them to express their queerness in ways they might otherwise not be able to.
You couldn't have crammed more liberal garbage language in this sentence if you tried. "Expressing yourself" is not even mostly beneficial today, bourgeois society gives people who shouldn't "express themselves" a big edge in doing so.
>If pornography is, as some of my contemporaries have put, "the peak of neoliberalism", why then, do major payment systems like Visa, Mastercard, Cashapp, Paypal, etc shutdown sex work and pornographic content creators so often?
The British Empire waged wars to sell opium yet I get in jail if I sell methamphetamines in London, curious

 

>>1877853
>But at the same time, I've dated a couple of Sex Workers, I've dated a dancer/softcore model and an onlyfans creator
If she's not explicitly having sex, I.e prostitution, it's not sex work.
I hate you disingenuous American faggots.

 

>>1877990
<no argument
>u..ur a liberal and a moralist and patriarchy doesn't exist anymore
Average porn addict American fuck on this site.

 

File: 1717661330626.jpg (126.55 KB, 956x1306, fink stop gooning.jpg)


 

>>1877972
>this is what they took from you

 

>>1877987
I love it when people say retarded nonsense with needless eloquence. Good point retard.

 

File: 1717663801639.jpg (52.91 KB, 500x500, anti sex.jpg)

i see anti porn people as a sort of backlash against the free love and sexual revolution of the boomers. personally im a coomer and even if you banned porn i would find a way to find it, oh i would, im an artist, i would draw my own porn if i had to.
what is it with young people today and being against the act of sex while wanting to celebrate sexual identities. its mind boggling.

being anti sex is unnatural, sex is the most natural thing in the world

 

>>1878017
>sex is the most natural thing
No
Violence

 

File: 1717666253290.webm (2.69 MB, 848x360, zardoz_guns.webm)

>>1878017
sex is bad. it leads to the brutals multiplying

 

File: 1717666631858.png (733.93 KB, 1052x1226, 8.png)

Alright, a plain and simple reply to OP.

<Let's define pornography as explicit material, sexual in nature, created by one or more consented adults, for the consumption by adults.

>Basically, is it compatible with communism?
I can't see why not. It just probably won't be industrial, which is a great thing.
>Is it inherently anti-women?
No.
I see no reason why it would be.
>Is it inherently unethical?
> ethics
Also, why would it be? What sane ethic would it violate?
>A sign of capitalist decay?
Pornography (albeit not photographic) predates capitalism by over a thousand years. No.

Now, I was not assuming industrial/professional porn, which may be what you assumed. That is a whole other situation, which does trend towards abusing actors (women or otherwise), normalizing abuse and myth, comodifying sex, addiction encouragement, and more.

 

>>1878017
I am not anti-porn, but one or two people on the board call me that anyway because nuance is dead apparently (hooray).
- The porn film industry is particularly abusive.
- The porn film website industry is absolute garbage and should be avoided.
- Porn and masturbation can be the basis of addiction.
I have created porn and regularly masturbate.

>>1877996
Low effort, no content. 2/10 reply.

>>1877890
If you've never masturbated to SFW material, I pity you.

 

>>1877853
>Basically, is it compatible with communism?
No reason why amateur porn wouldn't be a thing. People doing porn because they enjoy it instead of trying to make a living out of it.

 

>>1878044
>the Lenin treatment
You mean assassinate them for stealing the election?

 

>>1877853
Can't believe I read this whole dumbass post fucking hell

>these rando lib women I banged said it was totally more liberating to be a prostitute than to work as a waiter


Who cares what some random individual's personal feelings are on the matter? By and large, pornography harms those producing it in a variety of ways, they are not just being exploited for their labor, they are by definition also being sexually exploited.

Just because some poor sods built a massive cope in their head to justify this sexual exploitation doesn't make it ok

>Muh gays and queers


WHO CARES?? Gay porn is exploitative too wtf? Many of the male gay performers are straight men who do it because it is more profitable than straight porn or because they are coerced into it.

Just because lib gays are mad at Christian puritans and they think pornography is some sort of big middle finger to those puritans or it allows them to "express themselves" whatever the fuck that means, doesn't mean that the pornography industry doesn't harm/exploit them either

 

>>1878071
Are you telling me that people who make as much with a fifteen minute blowjob as others do working an entire day have an economic incentive to ideologically justify their "craft?"

What are you, some kind of Marxist?!

 

>>1878074
It's mindboggling stuff I know

 

>>1878044
>Give prostitutes the Lenin treatment as well as anybody else profiting from sexual deviancy

Let's say this is ok.

>make masturbation itself an offense punishable by reeducation and conditioning


But why this!!

 

>>1877974
I suppose you're okay with clitoris removal too then ? after all it's just a stupid religious tradition.

 

>>1878082
But, this path is going to nowhere…

Ban the cigarette, as it becomes an abstract necessity for people…

Then, ban 'love', how the soul gets enslaved by an another's presence!

I really despise and be scared from things such as alcohol, cigars, drugs and how they would alter my previous state in sudden.. but, is there a really an absolute metric? Aren't we conditioned by the mere quality of every moment we have, no matter the context?

 

File: 1717676326200.png (Spoiler Image, 160.5 KB, 600x1752, ClipboardImage.png)

>>1877974
>It's a stupid religious tradition, don't compare it to maiming children.
These things are not mutually exclusive at all. FGM is also religious tradition, as are other forms of MGM. Religious traditions have included human sacrifice. They don't preclude extremely harmful things. Maybe it's good that that anon brought it up because it seems to be causing religious reactoids to tell on themselves. No it doesn't matter if you think you're not one - you are in fact defending a practice because "it's religion" against people trying to improve society by getting rid of it. Raises some questions about the motives for some of the on-topic posts ITT…

>>1877982
>a minimal medical surgery
More likely than not you are not even aware of what circumcision actually does. It removes sensitive erogenous tissue (~15 sq in or 100 sq cm in an adult) that also provides other functions including protective ones. It was also not developed or popularized as a form of medicine, but as a cultural practice to distinguish Jews from gentiles. Later on the practice was reformed to its more radical and current form, removing significantly more tissue, largely on the basis that it would damage sexual function. We have written records from one of the most important Jewish scholars, Maimonides, declaring that "blunting the sexual instrument" through circumcision is a good thing for the moral health of society. This same logic was used by the people who popularized it in the US. They practiced other forms of genital mutilation too, but circumcision is the only one that caught on in the long term. Further, it was originally practiced as a means of torturing and marking slaves and the males of conquered peoples. The only reason it's not seen as mutilation (which it openly was in the minds of the people who started it) is because it's been grandfathered into social acceptance.

 

Porn is a way for monopoly capital to capture the means of sexual pleasure that was evenly distributed among the people before the communication age (albeit somewhat unequally), extracting a rent from them. To keep their horrendous machine running, it is beneficial for monopoly capital to create a class of affluent workers (labour aristocrats) that are able to produce the illusions of genuine sexual satisfaction robbed of its real social content, enslaving the pornetarian. Any genuine Marxist would realize that in the current era of monopoly capitalism, the labour aristocracy is infinitely more reactionary than the petit-bourgeoisie that is being dispossessed by monopoly capital. I don't mean to argue that workers in the porn industry can't be exploited, many of them are exploited if we use normal productive workers as measurement, but any reform would only strengthen monopoly capital in the long run. Marxists' priority in the current era should be the destruction of monopoly capital. Anything that weakens it is good. Banning porn (even if it only banishes it from the clear net) and making it a social taboo both for consumers and producers, if not a criminal offense, is good because it weakens the hold of monopoly capital over society.

 

Communism and porn don't go together tbh. Communist Party of Spain pushed the most recent anti-porn bills alongside the socialists. French Communist Party is the reason age verifications popped up last year and always some outrage with the Japanese communist party pushing porn bans

 

>>1878104
I mean we can debate about the dehumanizing nature of porn but a lot of that is honestly because Communists and Worker and Peasant parties tend to be dominated by older people compared to other mass parties. This is also why KKE for example do things like opposing gay adoption and such.

 

>>1878084
>FGM is also religious tradition
Not true. Completely disingenuous.
Why do you faggots come here to lie through your teeth every day? It makes me sick.

 

>>1878071
>Can't believe I read this whole dumbass post fucking hell
<replies sincerely anyway.
It's called bait anon… You're supposed to just call them retards and faggots instead of buying in.

 

>>1878074
> that people who make as much with a fifteen minute blowjob as others do working
You people are delusional retards. Prostitutes are NOT getting a days wage for a bliwjob.
Lie, lie, lie. Ylts sincerely all you faggots are capable of. Grow up.

 

>>1877951
In a certain light, "civilization" itself has that old Greek sub-dom idea baked in, doesn't it?

The "Old Guard" practiced something closer to the Anglo-Saxon apprenticeship system with early modern aesthetics, sexed up a little bit (but Puritans being duplicitous perverts, we really can't know what liberties the English took with their charges while disciplining them). In modern practice there is a certain sense of "personal construction" in a dialectic, not solipsistic sense, in which all this invasive training and testing constructs a more obedient, more disciplined, more resilient person.

The sociology of BDSM is complicated by the existence of three separate subcultures: a gay subculture (from whom the Leather biker aesthetic originated), a lesbian subculture (about which I know too little to speak for), and the pansexual/"everything else" subculture including cishets. Each scene has a distinct relationship between BDSM and eroticism, and the femdom sub-subculture of that pansexual culture has its own particular problematic arising from the contradictions of commerce, which Fennell elaborates here:

<But by far the biggest problem that femdoms inherit from pro doms is that in order to remain on the legal-ish side of the law, pro doms don’t have sex with their clients—and most of them keep to that rule. Yet in order to encourage repeat customers, they devised ways around the law to allow their clients sexual release without technically having sex with them. Typically, these involve fucking men with strap-ons and allowing men to masturbate. Hypothetically, it would have been just as legal for pro doms to have made a general practice out of having their clients use vibrators on the doms, or to penetrate the doms with sex toys, but these were not the practices they cultivated. I think there were many reasons why, including: the doms didn’t want to feel pressure to experience sexual attraction to or gratification from their clients, the doms didn’t want to spoil their image of unattainable sexual purity, and the clients were more likely to come back if they got sexual pleasure than if they were giving it. As a result, pro dom dynamics don’t really encourage women’s (dom’s) direct physical and sexual pleasure, and this lack of pleasure for the doms trickled down to femdom and would-be femdom interactions.


There are some practitioners who implement a more truly sadomasochistic model, who crave ego death and the wanton destruction of the total person. That stuff is a little more pernicious. (It also happens to be the modern right's most common interpretation of BDSM, to my great surprise.)

>more to do with how women are socialized to try to get along better

Fennell is closer to this explanation, citing women's ingrained traditional roles as "compassionate caregivers and passive sexual recipients" being such a long way from what feminine dominance calls for. That confirms my own experiences in the Scene, especially the difficulty I've had in teaching women closer to the bourgeois end of the scale the joy of active teasing and denial, the true proletarian erotics.

>pic

Most normal Angloids

 

>>1878110
According to google they charge up to 50 bucks for a blowjob, so two blowjobs for a days pay.

 

File: 1717679819191.jpg (80.7 KB, 1280x768, daboys.jpg)

Under communism everyone will cum to Hellraiser-esque limit experiences and nothing less. Anything else is pure revisionism.

 

>>1878113
Let me guess, you're one of those Republican faggots who doesn't want to pay people for driving the company truck to the first stop on their route.

 

>>1878116
I'm a Marxist, bro.

 

>>1878107
FGM is considered required by Shafi'i Sunni Islam and is considered recommended by most other schools. Most FGM is done for religious reasons in places following the former.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_on_female_genital_mutilation

 

>>1877853
To answer OP's question I'd say the "pornography question" is redundant because A. your preferred ideal communist state will never happen B. there are different cultural, religious, and philosophical views on explicit sexual material so saying there is a single communist perspective would result in a rigid one size fits all approach that leads to idealistic elitist retards shoving their arbitrary morality on people.

>Is it inherently anti-woman?

Nothing is inherently anti-woman. It only becomes so in a given cultural context. If I punch a girl in the face inside a boxing ring its completely different to punching a girl in a bar.

All this debate over how porn is empowering or not is total subjective bullshit. Who cares if Slutty Suzie likes to be a camwhore while single mother prostituting herself to put food on the table finds it harsh and exploitative? People are different. They have different reactions to the same thing and what benefits one person will disadvantage another.

>Is it inherently unethical?

Depends on your perspective and ethical views. I'd say some types of porn are very damaging. Hardcore 3DPD shit and easy access tube sites that have the same addictive design as youtube is harmful at a societal level. Drawn stuff, animated stuff, even erotic photography aren't so bad in and of themselves.

>>1878107
FGM is a bullshit made up word. Women in parts of Africa voluntarily engage in genital modifications. The practice isn't forced or coerced and communities that lose interest in it don't do it. Big whitey and liberals don't like this and feel its their responsibility to free the dumb uyghurs of the dark continent and bring them Enlightenment so they invented the term "Female Genital Mutilation" and begun leeching off USAID. Its just class politics as usual. Wealthy and affluent foreigners and their local proxies turning poor Africans into pawns for their retarded ideological games. You know, in some parts of Africa girls and women are subjected to forced genital examinations to prove they haven't been body modding, villages are put under surveillance. What is the class position of these villages? They are all poor and working class and they give you dumb Westoid uyghurs your chocolate, rubber, and minerals you love so much. Anti-FGM campaigns are about power and control.

>>1878125
Cites fucking wikipedia LMAO

>a gay subculture (from whom the Leather biker aesthetic originated), a lesbian subculture (about which I know too little to speak for), and the pansexual/"everything else" subculture including cishets. Each scene has a distinct relationship between BDSM and eroticism

All of these subcultures are garbage. I hate the BDSM scene. Its fucking trash.

Human sexuality is animalistic and lizard like. Its all about power, pain, and dominance for some and subjugation for everyone else. Civilization has tried to tame our monstrous urges. Now capitalism and De Sade poisoned leftoids are tearing down the guardrails. Sure, some of those restrictions were brutally excessive but getting rid of all the guardrails is going to cause serious problems down the line. Look at /pol/chinlets, they are all over sex, horny bastards who can't deal with extreme lusts which combined with their overdeveloped superegos produces a kind of brain dead nihilist. This is why conventional feminist sexual politics is naive. They think we live in a nice happy world of equality where sex is about love and equality between partners when sex is nothing more than animalistic fucking where somebody is the sub. Love and sex should be separate.

 

>>1878118
But the time spent dressing up and psyching up to suck a couple of dicks is socially necessary in the Marxian sense, while you are trying to portray it as a ten-minute job.

>>1878127
>All of these subcultures are garbage. I hate the BDSM scene. Its fucking trash.
Unscientific Angloid emotionalism discarded

 

>>1878113
20-50 euro yea, not a days wage.
Nobody is choosing prostitution over a job anyway stop being intentionally dishonest with this line of logic.

 

Sex is related to reproduction.
The desire for sex is crucial for the survival of the human species.

I personally believe that the feeling of "shame" associated with sex is a human functional defense mechanism. It serves to prevent sexual desires from exceeding normal boundaries and affecting other needs and activities. It might also elevate the importance of sex, optimize and raise the standards for mate selection, and encourage individuals to seek partners who meet their own needs.

However, with the development of aesthetics, virtual pornography, and non-binary gender identities, sex, like food, is not solely about the continuation of the human species. It also encompasses a pursuit that transcends mere survival.As society develops, numerous conflicts have arisen between sex based on physiological instincts and the more advanced stages of human society. It is evident that the most intelligent species on Earth is attempting to assign new meanings to sex, but this has, of course, once again led to internal strife due to a clash of values.

性与生殖有关
对性的渴望是人类族群得以生存的关键

我个人认为性的“耻辱感”是一种人的机能防范措施,它是为了不让性需求超越正常的界限,影响人其它的需求活动;它同样可能提高了性的重要性,优化和提高了择偶的要求,促使人们寻找符合自己需求的配偶。

但是在美学、虚拟色情与非二元性别的发展,性与食物一样不单单只是人类种群延续,它同样包含了一种超越生存的追求。随着社会的发展,基于生理本能的性与发展到更高阶段的人类社会出现了许多矛盾,很明显地球上最聪明的种族试图为性赋予新的意义,当然也又一次因为一种价值观的冲突内斗。

 

>>1877963
I think you'll find that most people with strong anti-circumcision stances are uncircumcised people from countries where circumcision is not that common (i.e. the majority of the world), who find the practice to be (rightfully) abhorrent and unjustifiable.

t. uncircumcised male from a less barbaric country than the US

 

File: 1717684101720.pdf (839.49 KB, 170x255, graeber manners.pdf)

>>1878151
>Sex is related to reproduction.
Immaterial and unscientific moralism. Read actual history instead of Wang Huning thought.

 


 

>>1878168
>graeber
pseud

 

>>1878170
>nooooo please stop deconstructing my rituals of power through critique!
No

 

Communism is basically neopuritanism. The social reformers in America often were extremely conservative and prudish with regard to carnality, yet they were at the forefront of efforts to promote equality for women, nonwhites, and youth. The elite wealthy are the ones who often perform the most degenerate and decadent activities and pretend that it is revolutionary, emancipatory, or salvatory. Lenin and Stalin are of the tradition of John Brown anderz Olivegw Cromwell.

 

>>1878169
No they don't.
Are you delusional or dishonest? Sincerely can't tell.

 

>>1878184
there's shitton of prostitutes telling this exact story online. you are wilfully ignorant. people chose money over 10 hour shift shit jobs.

 

>>1878172
>>nooooo please stop deconstructing my rituals of power through critique!
I don't have a problem with this. I have problems with pseuds like Graeber.

 

File: 1717685224909.jpg (27.66 KB, 512x548, 000003235689.jpg)

I hate these threads so much.

 

>>1878189
Have you ever worked with prostitutes? Do you even know any?
Or are you just lying on the internet to be an edgy faggot?
>people chose money over 10 hour shift shit jobs.
People 'choose' prostitution because they're largely locked out of employment because of drug addiction or undocumented.

 

>>1878193
>women don't have the agency to choose to become prostitutes, they can only be victims
You just repackaged misogyny to sound woke.

 

>>1878151
Shame is culturally conditioned. Not every culture has shame attached to sex, and many people in cultures that have this feature rebel against it.

Also humans are not the only creatures that engage in sexual activity for pleasure. Many species have been documented masturbating or having homosexual sex. There are even species that reproduce through homosexual sex that triggers parthenogenesis.

The thing about pleasure responses is they can become self-reinforcing independent of whatever fundamental behavior they were originally supporting. Since the pleasure response is not intrinsically tied to reproduction per se (meaning the actual creation of a new organism), but only a proxy for this (the sexual act required to do it), sexuality has become disconnected from reproduction only. In fact, human sexuality in particular has a number of notable features that distinguishes it from mating in general. Among these are how long it takes, how often it happens, how it happens independently of fertility cycles or breeding seasons, and how it tends to emphasize physical intimacy and often happens face-to-face. Sexuality in humans, like in bonobos, has evolved to serve a broader social purpose (although we don't take it to their extreme).

 

>>1878182
German "communism" is like that. Marx's "communism" did not seem to have that totalizing spirit that 19th century US history reveals in dozens of little religious communes with weird sexual practices.

>>1878189
And rightly so. Working more than 6 hours a day is for slaves.

>>1878191
What is your actual critique of the work at hand, and against what (and whose) benchmark?

 

>>1878203
>Sexuality in humans, like in bonobos, has evolved to serve a broader social purpose (although we don't take it to their extreme).
We would have it much better if we just rubbed our dicks in each other's faces to solve social conflict

 

>>1878182
Communism can be traced back to the Protestant reformation. We are in a sense the latter day descendants of Luther and Calvin even though we deny it.

>>1878193
There are definitely Gen Z uyghurs getting into sex work because they want easy money and a fuck but yeah the average street walker isn't doing it for fun. They just don't have social media accounts and brag about their job online. People see the Gen Z uyghurs promoting being a pornstar, camwhore, slut, stripper, whore etc. and think the average hooker is like that when they aren't.

I genuinely feel this new kind of social media sex worker is now the left's equivalent to stripper rap. I hate this generation.


Sex is disgusting. In a future society we should somehow abolish sex. True communism will be sexless. Male and female will be abolished and so will the social demand and biological need to fuck.

 

>>1878209
Why do you have to universalize your disgust for sex? You can't accept people enjoying things you don't?

 

>>1878203
Bonobo sex isn't extreme, it's just immanent.

 

File: 1717686589964.jpg (390.59 KB, 2048x1711, media_GMIPottXIAAcLcy.jpg)


 

File: 1717686611603.jpeg (155.76 KB, 753x800, IMG_7715.jpeg)

All anti-porn arguments are pure moralistic spookery.
I agree with OP that Dworkinite anti-sex feminisim is esentally the same as American protestant puritanism.

People should be able to create their own porn and do actions that they enjoy doing. Everyone on leftypol should read the "Ego and His Own". Just to kill the cop in your head.

 

>>1878209
>the average street walker isn't doing it for fun

yeah they're doing it for money like everyone else that works a job, god damn

 

>>1878209
>Communism can be traced back to the Protestant reformation. We are in a sense the latter day descendants of Luther and Calvin even though we deny it.
Exactly why we should sump the Germanic deviations from Marx and go directly back to Marx without all this Anglo contamination.

 

>>1877890
Furry Porn of course.

 

>>1878211
Sexual desire is literally a mental disease. It causes us massive suffering and pain at both a personal and a social level. Its why celibacy and asceticism are a thing. The Buddha was correct. Sexual pleasure is just delusional. Its like fast food that looks tasty but fucks you up at the same time. Once we escape the biological need to fuck we can be free of this hell. Sexual pleasure developed to encourage us to spread our genes and to overcome the disgust of penetration. It tricks us into thinking this pleasurable when it isn't. Why do you think people consume porn? Because actual sex fucking sucks so they'd rather watch a Hollywood style exaggeration of it as escapism.

A fundamental tenant of communism should be the abolition of sex and gender and the abolition of mandatory sexual intercourse and reproduction through intercourse.

 

>>1878225
>Its why celibacy and asceticism are a thing.
priests and nuns fuck and masturbate all the time

 

>>1878225
Did they finally let you out of the psychward?

 

>>1878225
Maybe for you, for me and my partner it's our love language. Stop trying to rob millions of people of their love language and reprieve from the drudgery of labor. You can be celibate all you want I won't stop you, end this aggression.

 

To throw my two cents in, the problem with much discussion of pornography is that it tends to be very idealistic. We're talking about the social value of a typical form of explicit portrayal of sexuality, and acting as if it speaks for all media that explicitly portrays sexuality; as if it's the Essence of Porn.

It shouldn't be hard to create high art with pornographic elements. Eroticism is a major part of human psychology, and it's pretty stupid not to explore it in art. Thus, the question shouldn't be "does porn have social value", but rather "how can we make porn with social value?"

 

>>1878227
Its because the need for sex is socially ingrained in us. We are psychologically pressured to masturbate. Like that other anon said, its something that's part and parcel of human social relations. Social psychology effects us. Sex is often a means of exchange. I think that's why society is so lonely and sex starved now because sex as exchange met capitalist modes of exchange and now getting a partner is like trying to get a job and involves fierce competition on a dating market. Sexual desire can be escaped but its difficult. That's because religious people treat it as an individual problem rather than a societal problem that requires socioeconomic and political changes in order to be fixed.

 


 

>>1878235
Sexually molested Protestants believe their ascetic faggotry is normal. Reaction formation works, big surprise

 

>>1878232
You associate love with sex and nowadays this is very common but historically speaking it wasn't. People in the past didn't see sex as a means of communicating love, that's a very modern thing and relates to the rise of a consumer economy geared towards love and romance. I mean, there is no real inherent connection between love and sexuality.

 

>>1878235
It's ok to confess you are an incel. Come out of the closet buddy, go find yourself a wife.

 

File: 1717687750318.jpg (87.53 KB, 1179x750, Ra_bnc- bEAAXFDT.jpg)


 

>>1878241
I'm actually bi and have dating in the past until I realized it wasn't worth it and all it causes is trouble. Sexual desire is just extreme attachment and it leads to suffering and pain. When you embrace celibacy and try to leave desire behind you will feel relief, freedom, and have more control over yourself. No worries.

 

>>1878240
>consumerism
read Engels you fucking retard

 

>>1878243
Were you dating a man or a woman?

 

>>1878245
AFAIK Engels only discusses the rise of the family. But even in Victorian times sex and love weren't connected. People had romantic affairs without having sex and guys going to see hookers and mistresses while being in committed relationships was pretty common. People married and did courtship for personal reasons or for socioeconomic reasons. Love marriage is a recent idea in human history and so is the idea sex should involve love.

>>1878246
Both.

 

File: 1717688200138.png (189.17 KB, 900x526, thinkaboutit.png)

>>1878249
Maybe that's the problem?
Your door is broken and swings both ways.
RETVRN to CHRIST and you will be blessed.

 

>>1878243
Return of the repressed. Your vow of celibacy is clearly not working because your resentment is spilling into you trying to convert the rest of us into your insane and frustrated views. If you were comfortable with your choice you wouldn't feel the necessity to convert it into a personal crusade.

 

>>1878249
>equating love and marriage
Retard

 

>>1878234
The reason for this is in the history of the mediums in question. Hollywood basically set the standards for video across the world because they pioneered it, and they used to have really strict codes about what they could show. Some of this is a lot more culturally specific (prudishness) and some is more of a function of politics (cops must be the good guys and win). As a result, various forms of rebellious products were relegated outside the main industry and developed separately. That includes more sexual, more violent, and more political stuff. Today this schism still exists thanks to the continuing dominance of Hollywood.

However, the ascendance of the internet has allowed people to seriously blur the lines between different types of content (not just in this realm but also things like entertainment vs education). As streaming took off, the less clear divisions got more codified into "professional" productions with higher budgets, marketing, and endorsement by official platforms. You even see some of the older internet stuff now on Netflix, and HBO is currently publishing Adult Swim content that pulls directly from youtube content creators (Smiling Friends). You still have distinct film, television, and porn industries, but they are increasingly becoming less relevant due to competition from the more open internet platforms.

Porn is slower to be replaced, because it has much more of a stigma attached and there are logistical concerns the don't work so well with show business (mainly things like liability, since porn actors actually have sex vs actor actors simulating it - there are different sorts of risk mitigation and consent to worry about), but sexual content is definitely becoming more normalized. There's not much reason to think the trend won't continue. The whole "anti-sex-scene" trend in zoomers is pretty overblown. Sex sells, and if you can get more people to watch by adding more sex there's a financial incentive to do that.

 

>>1878253
What about leftists? Are leftists so insecure in their frustrated views their attempt to change the world is just failure and repression?

My views aren't insane or frustrated. Its just pretty basic. Desire leads to suffering and sexual desire is the most intense kind of desire. Cut it out at the root and life improves. Do this on a large scale and humanity will improve.

 

>>1878262
I'm not a leftist. I cannot speak for leftists. But I know that you cannot WILL revolution into existence. It will occur on material conditions giving rise to it. My job is to be the right person when those material conditions are set. In other words, I don't wait for the Day of the Lord, but I make myself ready for when it comes. I have wealth, family and a measure of happiness. I have found harmony my comrade.

 

>>1878195
>You just repackaged misogyny to sound woke.
<n-no you have to deny reality or you're 'woke'!!!1
fucking faggot. get the fuck back to 4chins where you belong.
>>1878209
>There are definitely Gen Z uyghurs getting into sex work because they want easy money and a fuck but yeah the average street walker isn't doing it for fun. T
Sure maybe. But they will be a VERY extreme minority and when one uses them to make points about prostitution and why people become prostitutes they are doing it to very intentionally be dishonest about the horror of prostitution.

 

File: 1717689750547.jpg (100.87 KB, 700x622, gilles-deleuze.jpg)

>>1878262
Desire is good because it forces us to be productive to fulfill it

 

>>1878277
That is exactly why it is actually bad. We need to produce less not more. Desire cannot be fulfilled, especially sexual desire. so we can never fulfill it but deluded into thinking we can we exhaust and damage ourselves chasing it.

 

File: 1717690193128.png (1.81 MB, 1500x1165, ClipboardImage.png)

>>1878275 (me)
I mean, it legitimately makes me sick….
What kind of person do you have to actually be to look at all the hundreds of prostitutes around you, the drug abuse, the mental health issues, the rapes, the murders, and so on only to turn around, point to the single solitary 'doing it for fun' prostitute and say 'SEE! PRSTITUTION IS FINE! THEY CHOOSE THIS!'
The only reason i see that anons do this is an extreme hate for these women or a moral justification for their bad habits, but probably both lets be real.
These people are actually sick and if i did not understand you all have no connection to reality i'd want NOTHING to do with the left.
Glad however that they don't actually exist in any actual left which exists in reality..

 

>>1878275
Do women have the agency to choose being prostitutes or not? Answer the question, faggot.

 

>>1878281
>We need to produce less not more
Malthusian detected

 

porn should be banned thats a given

 

List of bait topics that endlessly get recycled here.

>is porn communist?

>was Stalin antisemitic?
>is China capitalist?
>is prostitution communist?
>was liquidating the Romanov spawn bad?

Crazy how the answer to all is no.

 

>>1878285
>Do women have the agency to choose being prostitutes or not? Answer the question, faggot.
What does that even mean you giga autist?

 

Pornography is the question and the answer is yet

 

>>1878293
One of these is not like the others

 

>>1877884
I agree and disagree. The real issue is the commodification of sex. That's what needs to be happen. I imagine people will create their own porn for free. Like people do now.

 

I'm a porn addict. Please ban porn so I can stop watching it.

 


 

>most active thread in months
Never change, /leftypol/.

 

>>1878266
>I'm not a leftist.
Don't post

 

>>1878313
>Desire cannot be fulfilled, especially sexual desire
That's a known consequence of male circumcision, actually

 

>>1878283
Hopefully you'll get sick and die when Protestant mores are criminalized

 

>>1878287
Neoliberal detected

 

>>1878344
>Don't post
And who are you exactly?

 

>>1878349
Neoliberalism is Malthusian

 

>>1878388
>reheating lame political disputes of the 1850s as if they were relevant today
Meds

 

>>1878388
>line must go up is Malthusian
Do retards really?

 

>>1878398
Nobody
cares
what
conservatives
think

 

>>1878411
1. Reactionary Socialism
A. Feudal Socialism

Owing to their historical position, it became the vocation of the aristocracies of France and England to write pamphlets against modern bourgeois society. In the French Revolution of July 1830, and in the English reform agitation[A], these aristocracies again succumbed to the hateful upstart. Thenceforth, a serious political struggle was altogether out of the question. A literary battle alone remained possible. But even in the domain of literature the old cries of the restoration period had become impossible.(1)

In order to arouse sympathy, the aristocracy was obliged to lose sight, apparently, of its own interests, and to formulate their indictment against the bourgeoisie in the interest of the exploited working class alone. Thus, the aristocracy took their revenge by singing lampoons on their new masters and whispering in his ears sinister prophesies of coming catastrophe.

In this way arose feudal Socialism: half lamentation, half lampoon; half an echo of the past, half menace of the future; at times, by its bitter, witty and incisive criticism, striking the bourgeoisie to the very heart’s core; but always ludicrous in its effect, through total incapacity to comprehend the march of modern history.

The aristocracy, in order to rally the people to them, waved the proletarian alms-bag in front for a banner. But the people, so often as it joined them, saw on their hindquarters the old feudal coats of arms, and deserted with loud and irreverent laughter.

One section of the French Legitimists and “Young England” exhibited this spectacle.

In pointing out that their mode of exploitation was different to that of the bourgeoisie, the feudalists forget that they exploited under circumstances and conditions that were quite different and that are now antiquated. In showing that, under their rule, the modern proletariat never existed, they forget that the modern bourgeoisie is the necessary offspring of their own form of society.

For the rest, so little do they conceal the reactionary character of their criticism that their chief accusation against the bourgeois amounts to this, that under the bourgeois régime a class is being developed which is destined to cut up root and branch the old order of society.

What they upbraid the bourgeoisie with is not so much that it creates a proletariat as that it creates a revolutionary proletariat.

In political practice, therefore, they join in all coercive measures against the working class; and in ordinary life, despite their high-falutin phrases, they stoop to pick up the golden apples dropped from the tree of industry, and to barter truth, love, and honour, for traffic in wool, beetroot-sugar, and potato spirits.(2)

As the parson has ever gone hand in hand with the landlord, so has Clerical Socialism with Feudal Socialism.

Nothing is easier than to give Christian asceticism a Socialist tinge. Has not Christianity declaimed against private property, against marriage, against the State? Has it not preached in the place of these, charity and poverty, celibacy and mortification of the flesh, monastic life and Mother Church? Christian Socialism is but the holy water with which the priest consecrates the heart-burnings of the aristocrat.

 

>>1878411
2. Conservative or Bourgeois Socialism

A part of the bourgeoisie is desirous of redressing social grievances in order to secure the continued existence of bourgeois society.

To this section belong economists, philanthropists, humanitarians, improvers of the condition of the working class, organisers of charity, members of societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals, temperance fanatics, hole-and-corner reformers of every imaginable kind. This form of socialism has, moreover, been worked out into complete systems.

We may cite Proudhon’s Philosophie de la Misère as an example of this form.

The Socialistic bourgeois want all the advantages of modern social conditions without the struggles and dangers necessarily resulting therefrom. They desire the existing state of society, minus its revolutionary and disintegrating elements. They wish for a bourgeoisie without a proletariat. The bourgeoisie naturally conceives the world in which it is supreme to be the best; and bourgeois Socialism develops this comfortable conception into various more or less complete systems. In requiring the proletariat to carry out such a system, and thereby to march straightway into the social New Jerusalem, it but requires in reality, that the proletariat should remain within the bounds of existing society, but should cast away all its hateful ideas concerning the bourgeoisie.

A second, and more practical, but less systematic, form of this Socialism sought to depreciate every revolutionary movement in the eyes of the working class by showing that no mere political reform, but only a change in the material conditions of existence, in economical relations, could be of any advantage to them. By changes in the material conditions of existence, this form of Socialism, however, by no means understands abolition of the bourgeois relations of production, an abolition that can be affected only by a revolution, but administrative reforms, based on the continued existence of these relations; reforms, therefore, that in no respect affect the relations between capital and labour, but, at the best, lessen the cost, and simplify the administrative work, of bourgeois government.

Bourgeois Socialism attains adequate expression when, and only when, it becomes a mere figure of speech.

Free trade: for the benefit of the working class. Protective duties: for the benefit of the working class. Prison Reform: for the benefit of the working class. This is the last word and the only seriously meant word of bourgeois socialism.

It is summed up in the phrase: the bourgeois is a bourgeois — for the benefit of the working class.

 

>>1878347
>Hopefully you'll get sick and die when Protestant mores are criminalized
Im not even from your gay country.
You people literally never have an argument. This is literally all you can do.
Just at least be honest with yourself you are a client justfying what you do. At least that is an argument.
Dirty rapist.

 

>>1878421
>I am entitled to be acknowledged and recognized as a righteous bitch with a claim on your surplus
Bend over fuckhole

 

in communism everything will be managed through workers councils
therefore prostitutes will be regulated by the workers delegates, and will have their own workers council
the services they provide, like all other services, will be public goods

 

>>1877853
loool i thought this was a screenshot from an fps shooter from the thumbnail

 

>>1877853
The thing with discussing pornography, particularly in spaces like this, is that it’s one of those heavily moralized topics where people start from the conclusion and then work their way backwards. People who like pornography are looking for reasons to justify it, whereas people who dislike pornography are looking for reasons to criticize it, and 99.999% time neither side is even remotely aware that this is what they’re doing. It’s why you see people attributing to porn adjectives like “exploitative”, “sexist”, “bourgeois” etc. even though none of that has anything to do with the essence of pornography, which is just “media of people fucking”.

Personally, I’m more interested in questions of productivity, sustainability, and viability. In this particular case, the question is, “how would the existence of pornography affect the viability of a communist society?”

And I’m inclined to say, probably not much. The porn industry, porn as a thing people do full-time and invest effort and resources into, is something that only exists as a result of capitalism, and its abolition would most certainly decrease the both the quantity and the extremeness of porn being produced at a given time by a good amount. Likewise, the misery inherent to living under capitalism would no longer be an issue, meaning significantly fewer people would need to use porn as a method of escapism to begin with.

This isn’t to say that pornography is “good for society”, but rather that, in the grand scheme of things, it’s not really something that matters much either way.

 

>>1878517
But as a so-called Marxist you should be the first to understood that there is no such thing as a neutral, ontologically defanged object. There is not 'just media of people fucking' because said media is always interpolated, subject to interpellation, and mediated through social exchange and consequence.
I think you are severely underestimating the effects of cyberspace and how they spill onto the real world.

 

>>1878526
*to understand

 

>>1878528
Basically ur underestimating the subjective impacts

 

>>1878526
>>1878526
>But as a so-called Marxist you should be the first to understood that there is no such thing as a neutral, ontologically defanged object.
I know it better than you do. Much of the discussion of porn acts as if the way it exists in the context of capitalism is the way it will exist in all societies. But that’s simply not true. Porn would not have the same culture surrounding it as it does in capitalism as it would under communism.

 

>>1878071
>Who cares what some random individual's personal feelings are on the matter?

Sorry babe, anon said getting off on camera is wrong and you should feel bad for doing it, back to the wage cage for you.

 

>>1878388
Dialectics
>Unbalanced UP leads to total DOWN
>Balanced UP leads to consistent UP

 

>>1878127
>Human sexuality is animalistic and lizard like. Its all about power, pain, and dominance for some and subjugation for everyone else
insanely cringe take goddamn

 

this thread is why the left is doomed. you would rather sit around and talk about porn than do something meaningful in your lives.

 

>>1878598
>this thread is why the left is doomed. you would rather sit around and talk about porn than do something meaningful in your lives.
Yep, in the ten minutes on my break i called you guys retards i could really have changed the world, who knows in that time i could have finded a cure for cancer!
Really made me think anon, thanks.

 

>>1878465
Kek

>>1878517
>media of people fucking
There is a lot to unpack even there. "Media" and "fucking" are broadly open to interpretation, never mind "people".
>significantly fewer people would need to use porn as a method of escapism
You seem to have assumed that porn is necessarily a broadcast medium and necessarily designed to inspire climax, rather than a peer-to-peer medium which can tititllate, educate, inspire climax, and more. Current technology affords us this capacity today, albeit mediated by markets, algorithms, and the state.
>under communism
Idealism? Are you saying that dominance is absolute when it comes to modes of production? I don't think historical materialism works that way; otherwise history could not progress.

>>1878598
How about not making demands on other people's disposable time to deal with the mental illnesses you call opinions?

 

>>1878598
We're here and losers due to material conditions beyond any of our ability to address, this thread is the fault of our grandparents and great grandparents

 

>>1878633
>his thread is the fault of our grandparents and great grandparents
<he didn't say the bourgeoisie
you fucking idiot nonce.

 

>>1878608
You're literalizing an obviously general sentiment, don't be so autistic/obtuse. He's making an implication with regards to the endemic tendencies and pathologies of the current 'left'.

 

>>1878608
>>1878610
>>1878633
>I can't change the world or do the revolution or change teh material conditions
>Yup life is pointless just gonna spend all day talking about porno
Fucking retards. Did you even read Marx's Theses of Fuerbach? Go outside, read a book, paint, learn something and stop wasting time and using this thread as an excuse to whip your dick out and fap "for research purposes."

 

>>1878669
I already donated to UNRWA today

 

>>1878663
We're materialists, not classists.

 

>>1878669
Reported for moralfaggotry

 

The fact the most popular threads of leftypol, always, are about porn, is quite something to think about

 

>>1877853
Is that Gillian Anderson? Looked hella nice back then

 

>>1878745
porn is bad because it destroys normal human interactions

 

>>1878818
The more posts I see like this, the more I wish this site had something like Lainchan’s rule 4.

 

>>1878818
>>1878745
Ban porn, legalize prostitution.
> Can run strip clubs in places you can't watch porn or go to prostitutes cuz muh laws.
> Because of muh artistic quality in the sex act its still sex act to sell based on one's body in lewd postures.

Simple solution, prostitution is one of the oldest professions around for a reason.

 

>>1878845
don't simp for coomer porky

 

>>1878349
From The Principles of Communism by Engels. Section 18 - What will be the course of this revolution?
>(vii) Increase in the number of national factories, workshops, railroads, ships; bringing new lands into cultivation and improvement of land already under cultivation – all in proportion to the growth of the capital and labor force at the disposal of the nation.
If you move into Marxism-Leninism it becomes even more pro-growth. Calling growth "neoliberalism" is the most revisionist thing you can do and it's just dumb because basic history proves you wrong. Stalin was a neolib according to you. Not a single person believes this.

This is relevant because the OP's question was about relations to communism, not anarcho-primitivism. That's not sectarian, that's just facts. You can go argue that in a thread but don't say Marx was promoting that because that's factually wrong.

 

>>1878961
Engels wrote a lot of books like manuals to try and describe how will everything works. "Principles of communism" said a lot of stuff that were the completely opposite of what happened in the revolutions of the XX century.

Here is the complete thing:

>(i) Limitation of private property through progressive taxation, heavy inheritance taxes, abolition of inheritance through collateral lines (brothers, nephews, etc.) forced loans, etc.

As far as i remember, tax never existed in communist countries, or at least played a considerable minor role.

>(ii) Gradual expropriation of landowners, industrialists, railroad magnates and shipowners, partly through competition by state industry, partly directly through compensation in the form of bonds.


>(iii) Confiscation of the possessions of all emigrants and rebels against the majority of the people.

That seams a weird part

>(iv) Organization of labor or employment of proletarians on publicly owned land, in factories and workshops, with competition among the workers being abolished and with the factory owners, in so far as they still exist, being obliged to pay the same high wages as those paid by the state.


>(v) An equal obligation on all members of society to work until such time as private property has been completely abolished. Formation of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.


>(vi) Centralization of money and credit in the hands of the state through a national bank with state capital, and the suppression of all private banks and bankers.


>(vii) Increase in the number of national factories, workshops, railroads, ships; bringing new lands into cultivation and improvement of land already under cultivation – all in proportion to the growth of the capital and labor force at the disposal of the nation.


>(viii) Education of all children, from the moment they can leave their mother’s care, in national establishments at national cost. Education and production together.

I hate education, in my communist utopia no one will read. Engels did not understand communism is not a state of affairs to be established, very silly of him. Reading is cringe, millions must become iliterate.

>(ix) Construction, on public lands, of great palaces as communal dwellings for associated groups of citizens engaged in both industry and agriculture and combining in their way of life the advantages of urban and rural conditions while avoiding the one-sidedness and drawbacks of each.


>(x) Destruction of all unhealthy and jerry-built dwellings in urban districts.


>(xi) Equal inheritance rights for children born in and out of wedlock.


>(xii) Concentration of all means of transportation in the hands of the nation.

 

>It is these women that the capitalists most willingly employ as home-workers, who are prepared for a monstrously low wage to “earn a little extra” for themselves and their family, for the sake of a crust of bread. It is from among these women, too, that the capitalists of all countries recruit for themselves (like the ancient slave-owners and the medieval feudal lords) any number of concubines at a most “reasonable” price. And no amount of “moral indignation” (hypocritical in 99 cases out of 100) about prostitution can do anything against this trade in female flesh; so long as wage-slavery exists, inevitably prostitution too will exist. All the oppressed and exploited classes throughout the history of human societies have always been forced (and it is in this that their exploitation consists) to give up to their oppressors, first, their unpaid labour and, second, their women as concubines for the “masters”.
<V. I. Lenin CAPITALISM AND FEMALE LABOUR

 


 

>>1878961
German "Communism" is not welcome here.

 

File: 1717778288867.jpg (8.23 KB, 300x168, amazon.jpg)

>>1877853
Pornografía ningo iporãiterei bro.

I stopped reading after your definition, pornography is subjective. I cannot discuss this matter until you choose to alter your preamble cause its got my eggs scrambled.

People marry and fucks their own cars for gods sake. Nothing is sacreds anymores.

 

>>1878845
Saw an escort last night. This is the way.

>>1878944
Independents escorts are barely porkies. Strippers and OF girls are if anything

 

>>1879353
We're coming to expropriate your silicone

 

File: 1717779228668.jpg (7.72 KB, 229x220, 1709205450839300.jpg)

>>1878845

Transactional relationships can lead to harm my friend. Not that prostitution should be illegal. Transactional relationships do not improve society, sociopaths demonstrate this behavior as a norm because people are a means to their ends. They do not value emotional investment and altruism. An open prostitution market could lead to a higher rate of emotionally devious transactional relationships becoming the norm. Women being commodified by multinational corporations for their transactional value seems inevitable if this were to happen. It may make genuine relationships more valuable overall but probably more scarce. This could lead us to a society which would be unsustainable.

It could also end up stabilizing into something which allows an outlet for transactional relationships, leading to less manipulation of someone emotionally just for a sexual benefit.

Free capitalism has allowed for OnlyFans to proliferate and has given many young women the ability to capitalize on this transactional courtship so it already happening in an unregulated capital market. However reading personal anecdotes and studies of the outcomes has shown me that it has created the type of chaos that leads to disharmony within onself and ones relationships with others. This goes for both sides, I'm still not sure if I can be convinced it should be legal, just de stigmatized and allowed to proliferate organically. HAve you seen the fucking videos on Figueroa Street in California? Looks totally fucked to me in this state.

 

File: 1717779582492.png (104.34 KB, 400x400, Retard.png)

>>1879353
Do you value the escorts you see in a way that ensures their long term wellbeing? Do you ever call them or speak with them not for sex but to see if they are having a nice day? These aren't gotcha questions, I'm genuinely curious because I've never banged a hooker, I can understand the appeal however because I'm not retarded, I just can't cum in someone unless I like them alot and trust them.

 

>>1879370
Im not against it. Id like that honestly. Its hard to keep track of these girls since everything good and fun is illegal in USA so Im always using burner numbers. Ive only recently been trying to keep in touch with them with shadow accounts on various social media

 

>>1878845
>legalize prostitution.
Doesn't really solve many problems because the most vulnerable of society who currently become prostitutes still fall through the cracks and cannot meat the legal standards and so operate under the rader, existing in the exact same capacity and danger as they did before the legalisation
> prostitution is one of the oldest professions around for a reason.
an cliched phrase is not convincing anon, you may as well have put 'an old wise chinese man one said' in front of this.

 

>>1879393
They would still be better off without cops having an excuse to extort and rape them

 

File: 1717781221572.jpg (92.36 KB, 500x666, sadclown.jpg)

>>1879388
Thats interesting, would you prefer an emotionally invested relationship over a transactional one?

 

>>1879394
>They would still be better off without cops having an excuse to extort and rape them
Cops will still extort them under 'protection' so will other gangs, they will still rape them also like other jons.
Let me ask you; do you unironically believe neither of these happen in any of the countries that have decriminalized or legalized?
>>1879370
>>1879388
It really just sounds like you need to go out into the-land-of-grass-touchers and make actual social relationships. not trying to sound like a dick. it will be cheaper as well as more fulfilling.

 

>>1879400
I mean sure maybe it still happens but it's clearly better if they have no legal excuse to do so

 

>>1879401
>I mean sure maybe it still happens but it's clearly better if they have no legal excuse to do so
??? It's already illegal to rape and extort. If the prostitute is legal, illegal or decriminalized has no affect.
Regardless of this, it is the same people either way, Legal or Illigal the pigs are going to tend towards hassling and assaulting the same prostitutes who are at the bottom rung of society, on the street instead of in a brothel and so on, these are the exact people which legalization or decriminalization does almost (being very generous) nothing to help.

 

>>1879404
>access to institutions such as banking isn't helpful
Retard

 

>>1879397
Absolutely

>>1879400
>go out into the-land-of-grass-touchers and make actual social relationships
Ya, but that's hard. Trust that a Gs trying but it aint easy out here

 

>>1879405
I don't know what you mean, i've never known a prostitute that didn't have a bank account. You need a bank account for state payments now most everywhere i've seen by 2024 and you will find most prostitutes, almost all on that bottom rung, will be on (and often in and out of) social welfare. Sure some trafficked women will not have bank accounts in their present country but that is due to a whole separate issue.
>>1879406
>Ya, but that's hard. Trust that a Gs trying but it aint easy out here
As long as you're trying!

 

>>1879413
>most
Reported for spam

 

>>1879413
Most prostitutes in Germany are migrants

 

>>1879418
…What?

 

File: 1717786748952.jpeg (82.76 KB, 572x546, 1646279603902.jpeg)

>>1877866
>>1877853
the desire for sex is a basic human drive designed to make us want to reproduce. You can't suppress it and as a result there will probably always be both a market for and producers of amateur pornography. Even in a non monetary economy there are exhibitionists, people who just want attention, etc.

What you can and should stop is FOR PROFIT pornography. Note this doesn't include erotic artwork, novels, etc. which is a totally different category but paying actors/actresses to have sex on camera would be de facto banned under socialism as there would be no workers/state run porn production. Any amateur porn would be legal and old porn from capitalism would be grandfathered in since any possible harm from that already happened long ago.

 

>>1878114
STFU Bataille

 

File: 1717794316096.jpg (6.85 KB, 300x168, download.jpg)

>>1879406

If you believe in a lack of free will, you can immerse yourself in an environment conducive to the thing you are looking for, if that is what you really desire.

I'm not saying that you should go to church but you could consider what immersing yourself in an environment conducive to the conditions you are trying to achieve may do for you.

Many clubs of interest have an undertone of relationship building into romance. I'm not trying to give advice to you directly because I don't know your circumstances but it is something for anyone in this type of situation to consider.

 

>>1879461
>Note this doesn't include erotic artwork, novels, etc. which is a totally different category
Who determines what goes in which category? By what rubric?

 


 

>>1877890
Honestly, the ones that have a story. I am sick and tired of porn that just have two porn stars fucking. OnlyFans just makes porn worse. Give me a scene, give me context. Give me plot!

I want to unironically watch porn for the plot.

 

>>1877890
Live your life and have actual sex and intimacy.

 

>>1879804
holy fucking based

give me some sleazey horror movie type, late night cable feel with full penetration, real shit

grindhouse but even more pornographic i think could be cool, probably cheaper than making an actual film

 

>>1879864
horror movie but the monster only kills people who don't fuck

 

>>1879804
But the plot these days is
>Stepfather fucks stepdaughter
>Stepbrother fucks stepsister
>Stepson fucks stepmother
Fucken Zoomers are demented, they've almost outdone the boomer obsession of schoolgirls fucking grown men to raise money for charity.

 

File: 1717848560363.png (1.29 MB, 1280x720, ClipboardImage.png)

>>1879804
Based Jackie Treehorn enjoyer, picrel
There are films like Shortbus but the sex scenes were intentionally filmed in the least pornographic, most clinical ways possible.
Frankly, I think we need to make cockteasing great again.

>>1879888
This sounds like boomer rightoid cope without a better and more particular media analysis. Where? When? Is there a platform playing tastemaker? etc.

 

>>1879960
>This sounds like boomer rightoid cope
Yeah you've definitely pounded off to incest themed porn(Watching too much incest porn)

 

>>1879461
>the desire for sex is a basic human drive
Right.
>designed to make us want to reproduce
Wrong. It was a random urge that our evolutionary forebearers were born with, and was then preserved because those that had it out-fucked those that didn't. It's not actually *designed* for anything; if it was, human sexuality wouldn't have so many strange quirks to it.

I'm sick of this pseudo-deistic view of evolution that attributes abstract purpose to its results.

But otherwise, I agree with you.

 

The social stigma of adult entertainment keep people from doing it. How many 10/10 women are stuck working 12 hour days due to this?

 

>>1879569
>Who determines what goes in which category? By what rubric?
one involves human actors and the others don't.

 

Something that always bothers me of this debate is that they act like hentai/porn cartoons do not exist and that leaves me (A man who draws porn cartoons) in a really strange situation. swerfs think that because some actress had to work under duress I should not be able to draw mickey mouse fucking bugs bunny, where is the logic in that?
Also if you're against porn you should wear a chastity device.

 

>>1883175
Being against porn doesnt make you a prude necessarily, it just means you think people should be having sex instead of masturbating. China for example has banned porn bc it was leading to male slovenliness.

 

"Pornography" historically has been paired against "art" as a dichotomy of a filmic narrative. You can have sex scenes in movies but they arent porn, because a film is a different "form" of representing the same thing.
It is a qualitative distinction that determines its own aesthetic judgement
In any case, i think we need more art films than porn films

 

>>1883178
thinking that banning porn will make people have sex is deranged.

 

>>1883178
A weird move when hundreds of millions of men in your country mathematically can't find women as a consequence of the one-child policy.

 

Porn won't be made anymore for the sake of profit, porn could still be made, but it would be spontaneous and only for the desire of creating art that stimulates sexual pleasure.

 

>>1883178
>Being against porn doesnt make you a prude necessarily, it just means you think people should be having sex instead of masturbating
You don't need porn to masturbate, and the opposition to porn is usually rooted in exploitation if it's not just moralism.

>>1883182
>You can have sex scenes in movies but they arent porn, because a film is a different "form" of representing the same thing.
Actors in movies usually aren't actually having sex to be fair. That said, the reasons for this have to do with economic regulation like insurance. It's in no way inherent to the medium. There are movies where actors have unsimulated sex.

>>1883233
China should make MtF transition treatment free or even give a tax break with it to incentivize the male to female ratio getting more even.

 

>>1883353
Will I be able to buy former bourgeois embezzlers modified for domestic catgurl use?

 

>>1883479
>petit bourgie because of culture

 

>>1877853
Capitalism doesn't abolish patriarchy but transforms it. Men and women are shifting from a Master/slave dynamic to a John/whore dynamic. Women are property but men are now renting women instead of owning them. It's kind of like black slavery. Black people are still enslaved but now they are more rented instead of directly owned. This of course makes everything blurry.

Anti-pornography is typically a reactionary attempt to move back to a Master/slave dynamic. Feminists are divided on pornography because while the John/whore dynamic is better than the Master/slave dynamic the John/whore dynamic is still poop. Also a lot of feminists are unironic eugenicists.
The actual solution is to organize the whores and respect their needs. Targeted porn boycotts of certain companies may be effective.

 


 

/thread

 

>>1887456

porn =/= prostitution, do you think wresting is real?


>>1887457
her views on trans people are batshit:
>The heterosexual men who dress as women like the artifice. They have a fetishistic relationship to dressing in women's clothes and using make-up. There is a lustful, narcissistic desire to be viewed as female. The fetish is a "mixture of attraction and envy that often leads these men to have sex with women while thinking of themselves as male lesbians".

 

It's really no shock that Texas (a state that banned abortion) is moving to ban porn, when, the original censorship laws in America (and England) were created to both control obscene materials and abortion access, even banning contraceptives for married couples.

 

>>1887486
I really don't get it. Conservatives move to either ban porn or abortion first and the other follows. When leftist talk about banning porn and/or sex work it's usually some often times misguided notion of it being dehumanizing to women and the sexist assumption its only a job for women. But if conservatives don't want porn/SW or abortion, wtf do they want? Is the only sex they permit rape, and reproductive sex? Why do they hate sex? Why does everyone hate sex?

 

>>1887489
>sex work
>misguided notion of it being dehumanizing to women
>sexist assumption its only a job for women

Go back to reddit

 

>>1887472
>porn =/= prostitution, do you think wresting is real?
Porn and prostitution are considered sex "work". The two are very much linked, a lot of pornstars are escorts. The scenarios and feelings aren't real but the acts are real.
>>1887489
>often times misguided notion of it being dehumanizing to women
It is dehumanizing to women, how is it not?
>exist assumption its only a job for women
The overwhelming demand is for women, most consumers are heterosexual men.

 

>>1887491
>>1887492
How many SW have either of you ever meet or even talked to? I get a strange feeling its 0

 

>>1887489
They don't hate it, they just want to blackmail you with it

 

>>1887495
you don't talk to coal miners to find out why black lung happens, sex workers in the imperial core are often petit Bourgeois anyway

 

>>1887518
>What, do you actually think that they prefer to work that kind of job?
Some do

 

>>1887623
Reported for pseudo-scientific religious crap

 

"sex positive" feminism is liberal cancer that disregards systemic analysis and the ways individual choices are influenced by material conditions. conservative moralfags are even more retarded though so nuanced takes are rare

 

>>1887492
>Porn and prostitution are considered sex "work". T
Maybe but they are best not to form in to one, they are very different enviroments that affect a very different subsets of people in very different ways.
>>1887746
>"sex positive" feminism is liberal cancer that disregards systemic analysis and the ways individual choices are influenced by material conditions.
Very true. I legitimately have never seen these people on this site come up with any good argumentation besides sloganeering and building straw men of 'morality' or 'prudeness'.
Worse I have only ever seen them conflate Prositution/Pornography/OnlyFans in to one thing, their 'sex work', in order to obsfucate the very radically different material conditions those within these secetors find themselves in.

It's similar to addicts justifying addictions, but at least addictions tend to mostly harm the user.

 

>>1887746
sex positivism is based actually, take the GDR Pill chinletdie and have sex.

 

>>1887761
>the GDR Pill
Prostitution was not legal in the GDR and it was treated like as a social issue, retard.

 

>>1887472
>porn =/= prostitution, do you think wresting is real?
So the pro porn people are now pretending that their "industry" doesn't generate a constant demand for both prostitution and human trafficking?

 

>>1877910
None, it is just an ad

 

>>1887828
Well, are you including drawn stuff in the bunch? Because if yes, then it depends

 

>>1887766
Since a certain someone keeps reporting shit all over the goddamn place for "rightism", I shall specify that an uber-generic "rightism", as in the right tendency within marxism, is not a bannable offense

 

>>1887766
sex was openly accepted by every corner of GDR society, i don't care that prostitution was banned, it was still positive about sex instead of going on about how icky and decadent is to have it, you fucking mongrel.

 

So the mods do in fact see the report thing, interesting

 

>>1887917
Spam reports
now that's a good idea

 

>>1887828
please quantify this lmao

 

Communists will wonder why the masses think they are all weirdos but then rant about how women should be covered up and how sex is degenerate.

 

>>1887756
>Very true. I legitimately have never seen these people on this site come up with any good argumentation besides sloganeering and building straw men of 'morality' or 'prudeness'.
>Worse I have only ever seen them conflate Prositution/Pornography/OnlyFans in to one thing, their 'sex work', in order to obsfucate the very radically different material conditions those within these secetors find themselves in.

You must not have read the OP

 

>>1887489
it's so interesting that anti-porn arguments always come down to the cliché of "that's someone's daughter"

"would you want your daughter doing that?"

It's interesting how the gender is so critical to whether or not the sexual expression is exploitive or not.

 

File: 1718683493825-0.jpg (Spoiler Image, 53.64 KB, 640x521, medieval torture device ci….jpg)

File: 1718683493825-1.png (Spoiler Image, 59.32 KB, 776x365, circumcision sadist.png)

File: 1718683493825-2.jpg (Spoiler Image, 169.76 KB, 653x1024, circumstraint.jpg)

>>1877974
Circumcision is an outdated practice from times when people didn't have the provisions to properly maintain their hygiene, because there's not many showers or bodies of water in deserts and middle-eastern plains.

 

>>1888273
The daughter isn't playing a gender role here, but the role of "viable seed" of the classical family order and the "community". Her contribution to the social order is her submission of her labor power to the masculine will, and particularly that of her eventual husband. Her duty is to understand "his" will correctly and produce a house and children in "his" image, so that they too will reproduce in true form.

Non-canonical ideas and experiences, often directly contradicting the florid protective myths of degeneration and ruin woven into their culture, in fact corrode the reproduction of their cultural property by tarnishing its supposed perfection. The classical household is constructed on the conceit that others have a general duty to refrain from interference in the reproduction of that property, yet they believe in no reciprocal duty to other ideologies.

Conservatoids are therefore fierce and relentless in contesting the nature and content of education and public entertainment, because their total system can only be reproduced as a community. Anyone losing their chains should be no less than twice as fiercely and relentlessly throwing rocks, spanners, and bodies preferably theirs into their cultural reproductive machinery until it is irreparably destroyed.

 

>>1888300
>an outdated practice from times when people didn't have the provisions to properly maintain their hygiene
No it isn't. That's historical revisionism that serves the pro-circumcision narrative by validated made up post-hoc rationalizations for it. People didn't even have an understanding of hygiene that is used to justify it (germ theory etc) until modern times. Further, it is not more hygienic or an effective prophylactic for diseases. Most of the world never practiced it and did not suffer for it at all. It was only considered "cleaner" in a ritualistic sense.

The - openly and often loudly stated - purpose of it was almost always to inflict harm, by reducing function permanently, inflicting severe pain, and inflicting lifelong trauma to deter having sex that wasn't approved of. This was very directly stated by the people who promoted the practice in the contexts where it caught on. The main examples of these are the Jewish scholar Maimonides who was supporting the radically more destructive form of the practice that had been popularized among Jews in the Roman Emprie, and John Harvey Kellogg who popularized the practice in the United States in the first place. IDK if there is literature from the Islamic world about this (other than influence from Maimonides), but that would be the other main group to look at on the topic.

 

>>1888720
>People didn't even have an understanding of hygiene
<Oh muh historical people were all savages!
Outdated narrative. Yes germ theory or whatever wasn't a concept, but cleanliness was absolutely a thing, do you think people walked around dirty and sweaty and stinking because they want to? Ancient Greeks for example promoted the importance of bathing and cleanliness, as did the Egyptians and Mesopotamians. However clean fresh water is not available everywhere, and you don't need to have germ theory to observe a pattern of dirt and sand and moisture getting under the foreskin leads to all sorts of diseases and sores. It was a common problem even in recent times, with US soldiers that weren't circumcized and who didn't have the ability to maintain their cleanliness had issues with their penises and it was so bad that the US military issued a rumor about Black Syph to encourage better crotch hygiene (t.knew vets and stuff from there).

 

>>1888720
I was about to post almost exactly the same response, thank you.

I would add, as late as 1935, in the British Medical Journal, one R.W. Cockshut (yes, really) tells us about how the British ideal of "civilisation" requires chastity.

>>1888732
The other anon is right. You're engaging in scientistic presentism and validating capitalist biopolitics by claiming they have been fulfilled. And of course only someone who has never known having a foreskin and the rich sensations and pleasures it provides would have such a casual disdain of it, that it might be something to throw aside like yesterday's underwear.

There is more evidence that genital mutilation rites develop as markers of social distinction between classes (Egyptian slaves) or tribes (Israelites, among others), and that medical rationalizations are constructed ad hoc, after the fact. The foreskin is a means of pleasure and gratification that costs nothing, but in a more dismal light, it is also in excess of the minimum conditions of human reproduction, and therefore potentially subject to appropriation. The rite as promoted by the Anglo-imperial diaspora intends, however tacitly, to damage the site of that self-production by separating practice from its conditions, to produce a more broken, more dependent, more submissive lumpen.

 

>>1888747
>pornography is part of a materialistic trend
Reported

 

>>1887910
>Instead of going on about how icky and decadent is to have it, you fucking mongrel.
>Rightist!!!!11
Quite literally responding to what nobody is saying. Only proving very well about those straw-men you are fascinated with in an complete and absolute refusal to approach the subject matter materially. Two can play at this game you see;
Look, if you want to throw large members of the most vulnerable people in society under the bus with moralizing so you can feel good about being an economic rapist fine but just admit it.
>>1888300
> practice from times when people didn't have the provisions to properly maintain their hygiene,
What? In a time before antibiotics and science-based wound-care? And what of female-circumcision?
Not an ancient history guy but that doesn't make sense to me anon.

 

>>1877951
>pic
makes you wonder who the real barabarians are…

 

>>1878017
>i would draw my own porn if i had to
been there

 

>Basically, is (irrelevant thing that neither favors nor works against proletarian organization) compatible with communism?
Stop making retarded questions for fuck's sake. Not everything needs to be elevated into a political issue, even less if you're a communist.

 

>>1878084
If it's such a sensitive part, getting rid of it lets you last longer which would make coomers even hornier.

Either way, I am happy I didn't grow up with a worm for a dick.

 

File: 1718739175635.jpg (220.87 KB, 1726x970, PAh33wcdjD2uZymnL45RqN.jpg)

>One must ask, why is sexuality shamed and admonished, but violence celebrated?
Civilisation begins with sexual taboo yet violence is an unconditional aspect of existence - our food comes from bleeding out animals while they cry for mercy. The sexual relation by contrast comes into civic consciousness along with the distribution of mates. One pertains to an anarchy of production while the other is regulated.
Interestingly, things are reversed today where sex is free yet even to speak certain words is considered "violent" and is prohibited. Even on this site you can post all of the porn you want but get banned for wrongthink.
Our morality thus has shifted pertaining to the relations of production where what is free is good and what is constricted is bad.
Its somewhat opposite on the right where porn is seen as degen.erate yet any vocal/textual obscenity is permitted. This aligns with the right wing glorification of violence and of sexual regulation.

 

>>1888789
Essentialist evo psych schitzoism meds

 

>>1888789
The issue is that women's power is only underlied by a vanguard of males who provide protections. Thats where real power is, in the state. Even capital cannot function without it.

 

>>1888797
>only underlied by a vanguard of males who provide protections
Cope, seethe and dilate, post-teen

 

>>1888855
Well i think in some sense youre right but also wrong. I think the dominant mode of mammalian males is of soldiers, huntsmen or lumpen. I think what today's sexual market creates is a mass of lumpen males, not proletarianised males.
Capitalism in general faces this problem though, where it arises in the first place through the disposability of excess life (wrought by the savong of children during childbirth which also spawned darwinian and malthusian thought).
Capital uses men's bodies as machines to fit into the schema of an excess which builds excesses as a result.
This today has reached a critical point especially with automation where monopoly (and sexual monopoly) pools up while the general population are made surplus and consumers.
Today there is much sexual consumption in porn made by sexual surplus, but there is a lack of sexual meaning.
Thats why i think the issue isnt inceldom (not having sex), its not having love - the same way capital cannot facilitate social relations outside of the commodity form.
In essence, we must overcome sex and be brought into love. Sex produces surplus by its nature, like capital. We need a more monogamous public consciousness. The issue isnt no sex, its too much sex.

 

>>1888855
>>1888861
>using "proletarian" to describe something that has nothing to do with wage labor

 

File: 1718743539809.png (16.29 KB, 220x223, ClipboardImage.png)

Even on the left, imageboard posters cannot go five minutes without making everything under the sun about how they're not getting sex. Holy fucking shit, grow up and understand not everything is about your dick.

 

>>1888866
>lacking analogical thinking
A sign of autism
Also "proletariat" is latin for "those who have children" and so signifies the self-reproduction of a class of people as opposed to the infertile bourgeoisie
Males as compared to females would likewise be analogous since males are largely by nature disposable while females are the carriers of the species, same way capitalists are the job creators for billions of workers.
>>1888868
>Bases sexual relations to "muh dick".
Dehumanising

 

>>1888935
I think in common places of male excess like the military is the presence of brotherly love which could also be afforded today. Now is the possibility of genuine friendship.
I have hope in the diminishing returns of pornographic culture though and do think the species yearns for authentic connection, where our matriarchal overlords bend to the level of the common man for her own inspiration.
A political tactic could be a male sex strike, or even homosexuality. But the ebbs and flows will organically align into balance over time, where love will rule as the principle of social life (and hate will also be castigated to the competitions of men in war that will kill eachother).
The meek will inherit the earth.

 

>>1888732
>However clean fresh water is not available everywhere, and you don't need to have germ theory to observe a pattern of dirt and sand and moisture getting under the foreskin leads to all sorts of diseases and sores.
It doesn't. This is false. We wouldn't have evolved this feature to be like this if it was such a problem. The vagina is well known to have self-cleaning features like most of our orifices (ears, nose, mouth, eyes), and there's reason to see the same with the glans and foreskin, but the subject barely studied at all because science as a whole tends to be ruled by the position of "it's vestigial at best and gross at worst" so little study of the subject is done. People will say "ew, smegma! Cut that foreskin off," but nobody says "ew boogers! Cut that nose off!" And nobody was doing it for that reason, they just switched up the narrative way way later after "I want to make sex painful and rare and instill primal fear of losing body parts in my child" stopped being an accepted thing to say about it. This isn't speculation, we have the records of people saying those things.
>It was a common problem even in recent times, with US soldiers that weren't circumcized and who didn't have the ability to maintain their cleanliness had issues with their penises and it was so bad
The US military has famously never ever exploited its hierarchy to conduct dubious medical experiments, huh? The example you just used has them lying about disease to trick people.
>Yes germ theory or whatever wasn't a concept, but cleanliness was absolutely a thing,
And circumcision has nothing to do with cleanliness.
>do you think people walked around dirty and sweaty and stinking because they want to?
Different cultures have different standards of cleanliness, but what you're describing is not particularly common. Especially compared to the kinds of things women often deal with like yeast infections and UTIs. But everybody understands it would be absurd to claim that you can effectively prevent those by amputating parts of the vulva. And the people who practice FGM generally haven't used that sort of justification until introduced to it from cultures where those concerns dominate. It's a modern concern for modern people. Most people historically didn't connect disease with cleanliness in the way you describe, so your argument is a non-sequitur. Depending on culture, the theories of disease were based on things like humours, spirits, miasma, curses, imbalance of life energy, etc. This isn't a matter of being stupid and unwashed. It's just a matter of science not getting there yet. You are projecting modern ideas onto the past.

 

>>1888866
Proletarian is a relation to property. Working-class is a relation to labor. The first, therefore the second. Don't take television "communists" seriously.

>>1888855

Cringiest mythologizing I have seen all day, /siberia/ pls go

 

>>1888972
>We wouldn't have evolved this feature to be like this if it was such a problem.
Hominids did not evolve in the Sahara desert or in muggy tropical rainforests, but in open plainlands, often near the shore and proceeded to spread out across different climes and areas which lead to the various "racial" phenotypes we have today. Higher melanin in sunnier areas for example. Furthermore, you do realize that prior to modern day human life expectancies were not high right? And you do realize that Evolution is about who can pass on genes, not who is less bothered by dirty penis. The sensory nerves of the penis and other benefits means that the negatives are outweighed.

Also you do realize I'm on your side that Circumcision isn't a good thing right? I'm just saying that in the far distant past when things were different, there was a possible explanation for this, but that this isn't an excuse today.
>The US military has famously never ever exploited its hierarchy to conduct dubious medical experiments
Considering that I literally made several effortposts on the subject, including on things that most people here have never heard of (such as the Plutonium tests) you're barking up the wrong tree. My point is that in THIS case the US military was exaggerating to its troops about a supposed STD called Black Syph in order to get the troops to start maintaining their junk properly and stop getting all sorts of issues with their foreskins due to neglected hygiene.
>circumcision has nothing to do with cleanliness
*sigh*
Take a person with a circumcised and uncircumcised penis and stick it deep into sand. It's a hell of a lot easier to clean off the former. Again, I agree it's not a good thing, but it certainly can make cleaning that area faster and easier.

>It's just a matter of science not getting there yet

Anon, you don't NEED science for basic shit, washing yourself is not a scientific process, it's common sense, something people have always had. You don't need science to tell you to drink water, your body tells you. You don't need science to avoid contact with a predatory animal, it's common sense, it's why when people don't follow common sense, we laugh at them. Besides science has existed for millennia and tenets about cleanliness and so on existed long before common era.

 

>>1888874
Fertility cultist

 

File: 1718758146240.jpg (135.11 KB, 1811x1784, 1718758006013.jpg)

>>1878127
I more or less agree with your answer, I wouldn't say it's inherently bad or inherently misogynist, but often manifests as both currently

 

>I've been doing research into what I call "The Pornography Question"

I bet you have mate

 

Read Dworkin /thread

 

File: 1718775332522.png (2.25 MB, 1080x1725, ClipboardImage.png)


 

>>1889196
In practice, being 'anti sex work' means you support cops and pimps abusing sex workers

 

>>1889196
seems very reductionist, and I feel there's absolutely SW who would disagree with this logic.
but here's the thing with an argument like this, it frames the person who counters it as inherently bad for doing so. If I was to say this logic is reductionist and even untrue, then I am essentially defending economic rape
So it would seem the only move is to not play at all

 

>>1889200
>In practice, being 'anti sex work' means you support cops and pimps abusing sex workers
Being 'pro' or 'anti' 'sex work' has zero bearing on cops and pimps (and johns, the economic rapists) abusing prostitutes. We already had this conversation you people are like guppy fish sometimes.

 

>>1889252
why do I have a feeling you have never spoken to a SW?

 

>>1887472
>her views on trans people are batshit:

>The heterosexual men who dress as women like the artifice. They have a fetishistic relationship to dressing in women's clothes and using make-up. There is a lustful, narcissistic desire to be viewed as female. The fetish is a "mixture of attraction and envy that often leads these men to have sex with women while thinking of themselves as male lesbians"


This is accurate tho

 

>>1889260

Are you sure you're on the right website dawg? I mean, this is so insanely transphobic that even your average /pol/ poster would go "damn".

 

>"Did you know the most well known anti-porn feminist is also a huge TERF who thinks all trans people are either men with a fetish or women being taken advantage of?"
<"Yes and she's based for this"

Says more than you think.

 

>>1889253
>why do I have a feeling you have never spoken to a SW?
no u. Child.

 

>>1889262
Nothing against trans people, I do not care at all what people dress up as or how they surgically alter their bodies.

That said, as I see it, "womanhood" is a class descriptor which is assigned to you due to your material body ie your genitals at birth.

"feeling like a woman" means nothing when you are materially in the class of man, it is pure idealism. Therefor the only explanation for this delusion is mental illness or fetish

It has nothing to do with hating trans people

 

>>1887472
>>The heterosexual men who dress as women like the artifice. They have a fetishistic relationship to dressing in women's clothes and using make-up. There is a lustful, narcissistic desire to be viewed as female. The fetish is a "mixture of attraction and envy that often leads these men to have sex with women while thinking of themselves as male lesbians".
This is literally what Trans people say about themselves

See this entire book (written by a trans) with hundreds of trans people saying this

 

>>1887457
>Uyghur says "thread" by posting a .png
Could you not have posted the pdf?

 

File: 1718794309388.png (139.24 KB, 450x382, ClipboardImage.png)

>>1889268
>materialism is a social construct based on your genitals
Last I checked people don't peek into your pants before discriminating against you by gender in most cases IRL. The "class descriptor" is applied ad-hoc based on context clues, which you can indeed change and trans people often do.

 

>>1889322
>Last I checked people don't peek into your pants before discriminating against you by gender in most cases IRL
Ok? Im talking about class roles in society, how it came to be that we even live with terms such as "man" or "woman" and what function they serve as to divide us into different classes. Just as people in the ruling class used to wear tophats to signify their class status, men and women signify their class status through culturally determined context clues. Which can change and sure they can be adopted, but without changing the material circumstances of that class it changes nothing. It's like a hobo wearing a tophat and calling himself bourgeois

the idea of "feeling like a woman" or "feeling like a man" is absurd in my view, it's essentialist and idealist. How could you possibly know what it feels like to "be" the other gender, without having lived the material experience of being in that class?

 

>>1888874
>my analogy is real and not a cum brained abuse of semantics

 

>>1889334
>post-nut clarity is bourgeois

 

>>1889278
Yes that is a good book
I think the theoretical truth we have to preserve in the discourse of autogynephilia is how AGP transsexuality is precisely a male heterosexual phenomenon, and thus we see how phallic masculinity can undermine itself from its own uncpnscious logic.

 

>>1889278
>AGP shit

555-come-on-son

next you'll tell me to read Blanchard

 

>>1889401
Idnt blanchard an expert in his field?
Also i originally read that book from a recommendation by blanchard years ago. It has a lot of data points and tries to link it to brain science.

 

>>1889405
entirely discredited

>This issue is further complicated by the term “autogynephilia,” a bogus transphobic “theory” posited by a crank psychologist named Ray Blanchard. Autogynephilia posits that many people who self-identify as trans women aren’t actually women at all, but are instead creepy men who are turned on by the idea of being a woman or having a vagina. According to Blanchard, their entire transition is just an elaborate fetish game that they’re forcing the world to participate in.


>I want to be clear, here: autogynephilia is bullshit. It has been discredited by actual scientists and researchers many, many times. The entire point of this theory, as far as I can tell, was to try and get cis people to start viewing trans women as male sex predators. Thankfully, most cis people don’t feel this way, and most of them haven’t heard of Blanchard or autogynephilia at all.


https://genderdysphoria.fyi/en/treatment

 

>>1889427
>he's wrong bc he's wrong
Great argument…

 


 

>>1889439
So i read the article and it is the typical self-denial of our sexual nature, where "sex" is a bad word in a sort of inverted conservatism, in the first instance.
Then it appeals to exceptions to the rule, not as proving the rule in kind, but in disproving it - this to me functions as a negation rather than sublation of existing orientations (where sublation is the negation of negation).
Then they rightfully appeal to the political discourse immanent to AGP, yet only see how certain truths are unspeakable since they could "corrupt" people, much like how users on this site are censored.
It wasnt really a debunking, just a long-winded critique.
Idc if people are critical, but critique also has its determinate object, and as far as i see, it is bound by self-denial, where people are afraid of accepting their sexual nature. Its the same violent response people had to freud to the concept of infantile sexuality - the more something is violently denied the more it is necessarily bound to the object of its denial, like how massive homophobes also get aroused by homoerotic activity. Here, homophobia is the transcendental (subjectively necessary) prism that gives life to homoerotic enjoyment. In the same way, the biggest critics of AGP are usually AGP themselves.

 

>>1889453
literally dozens upon dozens of cited sources vs you saying "trust me bro"

kys transphobe

 

>>1889456
accept that all sexuality is pathological and you escape your normative bias, conservative.

 


 

>>1889453
>this to me functions as a negation rather than sublation of existing orientations
And? Why shouldn't gods be killed when humanity no longer has a use for them? What school of retard are you to normatively hold idealisms sacred, on a materialist board no less? Such stupidity had to have been received.

 

>>1889459
Think of it in marxist terms - is marx an anticapitalist or postcapitalist thinker? As i see, marx wants to sublate capitalism toward socialism, not just strip out the maxhines of oppression like luddites (and anarchists, notably). Here are 2 positions of critique - negation and sublation.
When someone only critiques they leave the symbolic space open for a new paradigm, yet this is not offered up in critiques of blanchard's typology. People say we need something new so throw out all that came before and spit on collected data. Its childish and idiotic.
But this is your satanic mythology clearly of "killing the gods" to appease your frightened ego.

 

>>1889460
>Think of it in marxist terms
Uh, no, get your worldview shit out of my face and talk real philosophy.
>As i see, marx wants to sublate capitalism toward socialism
Just say you're a standpoint Marxist and I'll discard the rest as Pietist trash.

 

>>1889462
Im not a marxist, im just trying to make things make sense to you and your "materialist" sentimentality, since you seem confused as to why things are allowed to be *mostly* correct yet still be bound by contradiction, like blanchard's typology.
Being critical means moving within contradiction, where maybe you are sacrificing dialectics with an essentialist materialist doctrine?

 

>>1889464
>I'm not a marxist
If you're a German Idealist then read the German Ideology or just neck yourself.

 

>>1889467
give me the summary of it and maybe i'll pick it up
I read capital vol. 1-3 and marx still retains dialectics, despite "turning hegel on his head" like engels notes in anti-duhring
i will say then that the great critique must be political, in the german fetish for stately order

 

>>1889460
Marx didn't critique capitalism but all the mystification around it.

 

The threads least related to communism are the ones that get the most activity every single time, lol. What a fucking farce.

 

>>1889474
Elaborate

 

>>1889476
We're all 'nismed out

 

>>1889476
Sorry, Communism is dead. We Neue Marx-Lektur now

 

>>1889476
Gender is a bourgeois category and all bourgeois categories get the wall.

 

>>1889456

>anon makes actual argument

>why can't you just accept some random article I looked up as gospel, you're just sayoing trust me bro ahhhhh

great argument lol

 

>>1889490
>>1889509
he didnt make a argument, he repeated transphobic drivel

>>1889490

I think I would be better off just going to /pol/, at least they dont larp as communists while repeating transphobic nonsense

Why is this site dying? Because you people. I'm out. Kys

 

>>1889600

no one here cares about your idpol non-sense, especially when it is the push for trans shit that alienates so many in the working class.

 

>>1889626
>when it is the push for trans shit that alienates so many in the working class.
Never met a working class person who cares negatively about trans people.
It's literally always petite-booj cunts and media faggots.

 

>>1889626
Your fertility cult has no right to exist, angloid

 

This question can be reduced down significantly OP

"Are porno actors workers?" and "Can they be organized?"

The answer to both is yes, and doing so would help us WIN. You can tell just looking at this thread that many here do not want to WIN. They do not seek to forge a better, brighter future, only to enjoy the moralistic malaise that is feeling superior to others under the status quo.

Anything else is a moralistic spook designed to prevent us from WINNING.

A mass line approach dictates that we organize the most disenfranchised members of society first, and something else me your average Sex Worker is probably fairly disenfranchised, even more so if they are queer/trans/etc. What do these workers talk about when discussing the industry? Typically it's either the same type of worker's rights issues as everyone else (harrassment, pay, unfair labor practices, etc) or the stigma around them being in the industry.

<Have you ever felt pressured to act like a porn star in your private relationships?

>No, quite the opposite. Porn was something I did because I wanted to, and sometimes I missed that transgression and that freedom in my private life. My partners wanted to save me from porn. I didn't need to be saved from anything.

Stop being a white knight and start being a winner. These women don't need a savior, they need to be organized and made part of the revolutionary movement, anything else is anti-marxist.

 

>>1890321
>organize porn actors
>doing so would help us WIN

Win what, exactly? Porn industry? Amazing

 

>>1890336

>>organize fast food workers

>>doing so would help us WIN

>Win what, exactly? Fast food? Amazing

 

>>1890337
He's right though. Neither of these sectors get us near our goals, unless you're goal is confined within said industry.

 

>>1890422
Welcome to /leftypol/ where you are only allowed to do ONE (1) thing to bring about the revolution, and we count organizing workers in different industries as separate things.

 

>>1890422
>organizing workers doesn't help our goals

are you retarded?

 

>>1890336
>not slipping Marx thought into men's brains while they goon
Does it hurt being this stupid?

 

File: 1718926226546.png (109.74 KB, 480x563, ClipboardImage.png)

>>1890500
>not visualizing dilating Marx's bussy 8 inches every time you goon

 

>>1889600
>he didnt make a argument, he repeated transphobic drivel
He argued against your article, you didn't engage with it because you don't have a coherent retort, so you just resorted to calling him a transphobe

>especially when it is the push for trans shit that alienates so many in the working class

The working class doesn't give a fuck about trans shit. That is just culture war nonsense peddled by the right.

Sure some conservative working class dummies might be swayed by that kind of drivel, they always do, but they are marginal. By and large their actual concerns in life aren't about that.

 

>No, quite the opposite. Porn was something I did because I wanted to, and sometimes I missed that transgression and that freedom in my private life. My partners wanted to save me from porn. I didn't need to be saved from anything.

WOW, one whole quote of some chick who really wants to do porn

Who cares? Statistically there is a significant portion of women in the porn industry who are either forced into it, do it out of economic desperation or are in other ways coerced into an extremely explorative and often times personally degrading industry

 

>>1890524
>>1890524
>there is a significant portion of women in the porn industry who are either forced into it,
How so?

 

Having sex on camera for money is a good gig if you're not a prude.

 

>>1890525
-sex trafficking
-revenge porn
-social manipulation

 

>>1890524
there's dozens of interviews that say the same exact thing but I guess they don't matter bc they don't re-inforce your world view

 

>>1890545
None of those are the industry of porn.

 

>>1890546
>dozens of interviews
Yeah and there's dozens more of how people were manipulated into it or brought in under exploitative circumstances or victims of sex trafficing

 

>>1890548
delusional, these things happen in consequential amounts in the porn industry

 

>>1890444
>>1890443
Explain to me what organising workers in such industry really brings? They cannot paralize the economy in any way. Xompletely useless unless organised workers under capitalism is your end goal, in which case just become a socdem.

 

>>1890560
>They cannot paralize the economy in any way
Skill issue. Sorry for your wife (if any)

 

>>1890608
>source: my fantasy world

 

>>1890703
Source: I've had sex

For example, it's well known that professional dominatrixes overwhelmingly define their particular subculture. Let me just say that quite a few powerful men patronize femdoms, and they would be in quite a few interesting positions with quite a few interesting people, not only to chronicle peccadillos and predilections, but to inoculate them with propaganda when they are at their neediest and most open. If you don't believe this is effective then you have no grasp of psychology or history.

 

>>1890321
That's a bingo

 

>>1890556
did you know that hotel housekeeping is one of the most trafficked industries?

it's almost like it's an issue with capitalism, but sure whiteknight, every chick who's ever taken dick on camera is a poor, sad victim needing to be saved (by you ofc)

 

>>1890522
>He argued against your article, you didn't engage with it because you don't have a coherent retort, so you just resorted to calling him a transphobe

I didn't engage with it because he's spewing debunked transphobic nonsense

really this site isn't much different than /pol/ at all

just call me the slur

 

>>1890713
>Rich and powerful men will act solely in accordance with prostitutes' wishes
Not sure if radical feminist who has never touched a man in her entire life or deluded prostitute who confuses men nodding to what she says to active support for her political ideology when really all they want to do is get to the fucking part already

 

>>1891071
And there is nothing wrong with taking dick on cam
>>1891073
Calm down, lady
>>1891075
The poster is talking about information "control"
Not conversion or whatever lol
Ideology is overrated

 

>>1890337
Yes, fast food workers organizing achieves nothing. Fast food is not cornerstone of society, industrial production is. Also, you can replace fast food workers quite easily because no education is required, while industrial jobs demand skills, thus constant deficit of specialists, thus organizational work is actually effective

And you can get sex literally for free lmao, organizing sex work is not only pointless but also taints actual human relations with capitalist nonsense

 

>>1890608
>red district is rebelling!
>people affected: sex tourists
That'll show them!

 

This is a stupid thread because the only people who should be having this conversation are porn stars themselves, people can pontificate about what they feel the conditions for porn actors are (i.e either they're all liberated free spirits making bank of of free love or trafficked minors from the third world sold into televised sex slavery) but only they can really understand themselves.

The only reason why this thread got any traction is because porn (and sex in general) is a controversial and taboo subject and people aren't mature enough to avoid engaging in the controversy, but the thread has just as little substance as one that involves a load of random anons of all different backgrounds and professions asking themselves about "The Postman Question".

 

>>1889627
Anti-trans is rational in a way. It's been said but there is a certain "slippery slope" which does exist. Wiping out gender roles would be a massive and progressive step. There's a reason why the reactionary/conservative loves to use arguments like "It starts with this and then the next thing is…"
The endpoint being some fantasy of "communism".
I'd say they aren't too off in the main (quite by accident) even if it is of course extremely delusional thinking.

 

>>1891081
Industrial work can be unskilled, you have a whole range of skill levels working in a factory

 

>>1891081

We are never winning shit with losers like you on our team god damn dog

listen to yourself talk

 

>>1891095
>we turn doninatrixes communist, and then they'll zombify their rich johns into communism!
>that's how we WIN!

>>1891089
Even "unskilled" industrial work requires more skills than fast food, lmao. At the very least you'd need muscles

 

>>1891089
A lot of das kapital is marx talking about factory work being automated since capital wrings out the essence of labour to be unskilled and mechanical, which is how it becomes quantified as a commodity.

 

>>1891071
>being forced to clean houses is the same as getting raped

Actually fucking kill yourself you absolute retard

 

>>1891097
In warehouses men and women work together and if you need help lifting something you just ask someone next to you. Strength isnt an issue since all minimum wage work is unskilled labour

 

>>1891100
You must realise this take is really immature, just as immature as the take you're understandably upset at.

 

>>1891073
>I didn't engage with it because he's spewing debunked transphobic nonsense

No you didn't engage with it because you have nothing sustentative to reply with, and thus resort to namecalling. Just as you are doing now

>really this site isn't much different than /pol/ at all

cry more

>just call me the slur

>This is actually all about ME personally and how you hate me and the mean words people say

Jesus christ get a hold of yourself, nobody cares that you're trans or whatever

 

>>1891105

just call me the slur you transphobic piece of shit, agp is entirely debunked and only peddled by transphobes

kill.
your.
self.

 

>>1891108
Mentally ill transhumanist can't handle science, news at 11

people like you bring down the entire communist movement, people like you push away actual workers with their idpol nonsense. You will never be a woman.

 

>>1891101
>Strength isnt an issue since all minimum wage work is unskilled labour

Yeah, you sound like a woman or a femboy who didn't actually work in retail or storehouses. Men are naturally more in demand on those kinds of jobs, lol

 

>>1891108
>agp is entirely debunked
Its not tho, its just angrily sperged against by autogynephiles.

 

awesome, wonderful thread, glad transphobia is board culture

 

>>1891108
I really really really do not care about you wanting to be a woman or whatever, you have no idea how little it interests me

Just repeating "it's been deboonked" over and over again without actually engaging with anything being said makes it seem like you don't have a leg to stand on argumentatively. I am personally not bought into agp one way or another, but your insanely retarded reaction makes me believe in it more

 

Ladies, ladies, you are both wrong

 

>>1891111
But i have worked physical jobs. Yes there are more men, but women still work there, but its usually immigrant women.
And it is still unskilled labour to just pick things up or move things around. You get trained in a day.

 

>>1891108
sorry we dont want to larp for your fetish

 

>>1891117
>just pick things up or move things around

Now that's what I call bigotry

 

>>1891114
What is being said that is transphobic? Other than the one anon going off about how "trans are pushing away the workers with idpol" nonsense,

 

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/epub/10.1177/0038026120934690?domain=p2p_domain&token=TYEYDTW3TTJDUJTMYM6F

http://www.juliaserano.com/av/Serano-CaseAgainstAutogynephilia.pdf

Activist and law professor Florence Ashley writes that the autogynephilia concept has been "discredited", and that Bailey's and Blanchard's work "has long been criticised for perpetuating stereotypes and prejudices against trans women, notably suggesting that LGBQ trans women's primary motivation for transitioning is sexual arousal."[56]

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), autogynephilia has been promoted by anti-LGBT hate groups.[93][94][95] These include the Family Research Council (FRC), United Families International (UFI), and the American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds).[93][94][95] Both Blanchard and Bailey have written articles for 4thWaveNow, which the SPLC describes as an anti-trans website.[93]

I guess thinktankism is based if it lets you use "science" as a shield for your bigotry. Thank god you people don't have the balls to say shit irl.

 

>>1891127
>LGBQ trans women's primary motivation for transitioning is sexual arousal."

I thought you were all for sexual emancipation and normlization of sex work and stuff? Come out of your shell and be consistent

 

>>1891132

why are you like this?

 

>>1891127

41%
YWNBAW
cope + seethe + dilate

the working class rejects your degeneracy, want to be coddled? go back to reddit

 

>>1891134
Like what? I've looked up some random research, it said that agp exists in 3% of males. Why does this translates into "trans people are bad because it's just a kink for them" in your mind? Or those other people from American College of Pediatrics, for example?

You want normalization of sex work and unionization of dominatrixes, but then you are too shamefast to admit that you have agp or some shit. That's inconsistency in my eyes

 

>>1891127

god damn I hate transhumanists, kys

 

>>1891127
>Activist and law professor Florence Ashley writes that the autogynephilia concept has been "discredited"
Ok how? I skimmed the articles you posted and it basically just says "it's more complicated" & "transphobes use it to discredit trans people" "correlation does not equal causation" etc. but those aren't refutations, they're just babble about how people are heteronormative or whatever

>According to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), autogynephilia has been promoted by anti-LGBT hate groups.[93][94][95] These include the Family Research Council (FRC), United Families International (UFI), and the American College of Pediatricians (ACPeds).[93][94][95] Both Blanchard and Bailey have written articles for 4thWaveNow, which the SPLC describes as an anti-trans website.[93]


Yeah, rightoid transphobes will use any and all things to attack trans people. That doesn't mean that agp holds no validity, it is not an argument

>>1891136
kys, reactionary scumbag

 

>>1891143

do you think homosexuality is a mental illness or are you smart enough to see why that's been discredited?

>>1891136
>>1891139
>>1891138
>>1891105

yeah i'm starting to realize this place ain't for ppl like me, that's fine, I know that these types of people don't do IRL organizing. Peace out, I have zero interest in engaging with this website or it's userbase of reactionaries.

 

>>1891144
>do you think homosexuality is a mental illness or are you smart enough to see why that's been discredited?
homosexuality is just about whoever you want to goon to most. It is not like transness at all, which makes substantial claims about their class identity

If a white person says that they "feel" like they're a black person trapped in a white mans body or if a wage worker "feels" like a capitalist, that wouldn't make any sense and we would tell that person to get checked out for this delusion. But somehow when it's a man or a woman that "feels" like they are what they are not, that somehow makes perfect sense. This does not make any sense to me

>yeah i'm starting to realize this place ain't for ppl like me, that's fine, I know that these types of people don't do IRL organizing. Peace out, I have zero interest in engaging with this website or it's userbase of reactionaries

>everyone that disagrees with me is a reactionary

Look if you don't want to argue cuz it's getting you all up in your feelings just say that, no need for the moralizing lecture lol

 

>>1891144
I tend to agree however it's funny in that you see the degeneration to the "lowest common denominator" in real time
And I'm here for it

 


 

>>1891154
>But somehow when it's a man or a woman that "feels" like they are what they are not, that somehow makes perfect sense. This does not make any sense to me

https://genderdysphoria.fyi/

here ya go, educate yourself or go back to /pol/

 

Look, here's why I don't care:
You people are largely trash.
It doesn't matter what you think.
Get a life.

 

>>1891160
https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/body-integrity-identity-disorder-biid

Explain why gender dysphoria should be treated any different to treatment for BIID

 

>>1891163
i dont care about this shit dog, i'm closing the tab.

 

>>1891160
What do you think about incels? They suffer immensely, and some are even willing to die to stop that pain

 

Oh no, don't go
Anyway, let's bring it back to the topic of SEX
Who's up?

 

>>1891166
Hilarious

 

>>1891159
No because I think the LGBT "debate" is completely inconsequential to the working class. The only people who are actively discouraged by it are braindead rightoids who bought into culture war nonsense

>>1891160
>gender is a social construct and some people feel body dysmorphia due the imposition of rigid gender roles in western society


Yeah, we all know this. You're not educating anyone on anything dipshit

 

>are braindead rightoids who bought into culture war nonsense
But aren't you kind of participating in it now? Even to push back on the idea that this is an incredibly important subject (in a negative sense for rightoids and in a positive sense for everyone else), I suspect you're correct but that reality is just unvoiced due to the lack of interest, I don't think most people would spend the time to tell a presumably trans person that they're not nearly as stoked about their gender identity as they are.

 

>>1891180
>stoked about their gender identity
Tried to imagine a person stoked about their gender identity and all I could think of is AJJ

 

>>1891180
>But aren't you kind of participating in it now?
No, im just arguing about stuff online, because I like discussion and I think it's an interesting topic. That doesn't mean Im pushing the idea that it's of any major consequence to the class struggle or any other societal issue not directly related to trans issues.

>I suspect you're correct but that reality is just unvoiced due to the lack of interest, I don't think most people would spend the time to tell a presumably trans person that they're not nearly as stoked about their gender identity as they are.

Yeah most normal people just dont give a fuck about other people's personal identities. And why would they?

 

>>1891187
What's a normal person?

 

>>1891188
Average working people who are, for the most part, not absorbed into political culture war bullshit

 

>>1891189
So average and normal are synonyms or near-synonyms. Thanks human.

 


 

>>1891193
Big ups :thumbsup: :thumbsup::thumbsup: :thumbsup:

 

>>1890321
only correct opinion ITT

 

>>1891170
>No because I think the LGBT "debate" is completely inconsequential to the working class. The only people who are actively discouraged by it are braindead rightoids who bought into culture war nonsense
Perhaps it works well as a modern flake filter. Keeping classist, statist, monetarist tendencies out of any movement for the classless, stateless, moneyless society seems important somehow.

>>1891189
And from which part of your ass did you pull that "norm" and why do you feel compelled to comply with anything that presents as a norm?

 

File: 1718972842531.mp4 (Spoiler Image, 7.75 MB, 1280x720, 5uRT_xpSLOfoJwqU.mp4)


 

>>1891170
>No because I think the LGBT "debate" is completely inconsequential to the working class.

have you considered there are LGBT members of the working class?

 

>>1891230
Obviously homophobes and people who shit on marginalized people have no place on the left, as they do not show true solidarity with the working class, only conditional (ie, they gotta be straight/cis/whatever)

>And from which part of your ass did you pull that "norm"

My experience interacting with regular working class people every day and how they are not interested in LGBT issues one way or another

> and why do you feel compelled to comply with anything that presents as a norm?


Im not "complying" with anything. Some other anon was talking about how the working class is being "discouraged" from the left cuz of lgbt issues. Im simply stating that actual working class people, by and large, do not give a fuck about this

 

>>1891242
Is this supposed to be an argument? The fact that they are gay is not relevant to their working class status, they do not care about lgbt issues as working class, they care about lgbt issues as lgbt

 

>>1891245
Ah, OK. That makes sense and mostly agrees with my own experience. I'd note that lower-middles (skilled laborers in a factory) still include many elements who are spooked af about their cultural reproduction, having just met the threshold where the ingredients of a proper bourgeois household and the possibility of reproducing it are within reach.

>>1891251
What about issues like employment discrimination on the basis of reproductive alignment?

 

They don't want you to know that the reason so many men are becoming women is because of porn.

It's no shock transwomen are so over represented in porno when the whole thing is a fetish (see: Blanchard)

(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS NONSENSE)

 

>>1891310
>fetish = bad
This is what no psychoanalysis looks like
Everyone is bound by primal repression and fetishism. Civilisation itself is built on the incest taboo. Existence is neurotic.

 

>>1891310
>It's no shock transwomen are so over represented in porno
It is? Are you sure you're not projecting your personal tastes/habits onto pornography in general?

Also you're a retard to think more people are trans today rather than they're just more visible due to feeling comfortable and united enough to live more openly in the modern age, something people like you are simply just trying to reverse.

 

>>1890713
Communism is when you proseltyze and when everyone is convinced we have the kingdom of heaven on—- Communism!
I legitimately hate you.

 

>>1891316
essentialist

 

>>1891321
>This is some new age bullshit caused by porn
<No it isn't
>Essentialist
A worthwhile and sensible exchange there

 

>>1891323
Your essentialism is thinking that you can "be" transgender without it being socially affirmed. The fight for transgender identity is the fight for recognition for a reason.
In any case i am historical and dont believe in diagnosing flesh with possessing a transgender soul - but i see the reality of a transgender geist in society.

 

>>1891326
Big words just to say "I think they're faking it".

 

>>1891184
<Andrew Jackson Jihad
Seen them on this album tour. Were really good.
Had a guest musician playing with them who was trans funny enough.

 

>>1891328
You're going to be the star of one of those karen videos on youtube someday, I just know it

 

>>1891328
if thats your credulity to "big words" then clearly you are mentally retarded and shouldnt be on this site

 

>>1891316
there's literally an entire porn website dedicated to turning people trans

https://hypnotube.com/index.php

 

>>1891333
But that is essentially what you're saying isn't it? It's more retarded to think more formal language can obscure a very simplistic and uninquisitive opinion.

 

>>1891335
Again, this could be personal habits because you're thinking a very specific website you happen to know of catering to a very specific fetish proves over-representation of trans women in porn.

 

>>1891332
I think I'm the victim of a Karen right now

 

>>1891337
My point isnt at all that they're "faking it". My point is that even to be ourselves we must have mutual recognition in society. We cannot be ourselves in ourselves. There is no inner world of authenticity. The real world is in what we create with other people.
Its the same with gay men. There is no gay gene, yet there is a gay type. There is a space open for this negativity. Transgenders are fundamentally fighting for this space to be themselves in too.

 

>>1891335
>another oversocialized teen raised in a conservative home is shocked that social objects can be exploited and turned to use against the wishes of their users and creators
Your only use in a revolution is meat shield, because you are too stupid and/or precious to be a gain in any contest. Kys loser

 

>>1891345
If a man wears women's panties and no one is around to feel their satisfaction, are they really trans?

 

>>1891310
>so many men are becoming women is because of porn.
White western men you mean. It's not because of porn. It's because capitalism. It rots minds. Maybe the combination of both doesnt help. It's primarily capitalism

 

>>1891348
Exactly. To the retard or rightoid, "trans" refers to any transgression against the insipid, infantile, overweening gender ideals of European Christianity. I say put the entire Christian social ideology into a blender and feed it back to them rectally.

 

>>1891348
No. But this is the same reason why there were no gay men in ancient rome, because there was no integral concept of homosexuality. Only in modernity does the gay man arise in his inherent leftism (where the closeted homoerotic is his right-wing counterpart).

 

>>1891278
Many of the working class will always be spooked by whatever reactionary fears the bourgeois or the prospect of becoming bourgeois installs in them, jews, immigrants, gays, etc. But by and large these fears seem minor to me as far as lgbt goes. Only hugely conservatoid religious freaks really care about this

>What about issues like employment discrimination on the basis of reproductive alignment


Same answer, it is not relevant to their status as working class. They are concerned about discrimination regarding lgbt issues because they are lgbt, not because they are working class

 

>>1891328
you're a pea brained moron if you think this guy said any big words

 

>>1891399
>Same answer, it is not relevant to their status as working class
Exactly, and if you are a dedicated soldier of political economy therefore you should be attacking any entity that dares to discriminate employment matters with regard to any other social property.

 

>>1891406
Ok? The point was that the working class, by and large, does not care about lgbt issues as it is inconsequential to being working class.

Of course all forms of discrimination should be fought against

 

>>1891082
Places where sex tourism is a thing tend to have tourism as a big part of their economy. If you slow down or shut down sex tourism then that would actually majorly affect the place.

 

So many of the most anti-porn people are former porn stars, they run many NPOs bringing light to the porn industry. What does that tell you?

 

>>1891475
That jobs exist to provide profit for some and salaries for many and within that some people hate the jobs they do, some are ambivalent to it and others would do it even if they didn't need the salary.

 

>>1891475
>There's former OBGYN techs who are pro-life. What does that tell you?

 

>>1891475
Everybody wants a lazy email job

 

>>1891475
>the porn industry makes 100% of porn

 

>>1891475
>former porn stars
What an old and stupid shit take. I dont think Ive ever heard of a soft core, cam girl or only fans creator being anti-porn. We're not in the day anymore where all porn is produced by the same companies in LA. Obviously a lotta of these people will speak out on the visible poor treatment you see on camera. But today porn performers are just opting for caming and only fans and other more independent means

 

>>1891475
>So many of the most anti-porn people are former porn stars

I literally know of like one, who became an evangelical grifter.

 

people should be free to post videos of themselves fucking or jerking off online for their own amusement but putting a price tag on it creates really fucked up and weird situations

 

>>1891605
true, it's called free love for a reason

 

File: 1719008276394.jpg (51.73 KB, 500x682, free shrugs.jpg)

>>1891310
>>1891314
I have no idea why so many people's psychology "gotchas" are tied around shaming people for being horny, or why it's so weirdly affective on authoritarian types. It's reminiscent of "being gay isn't a choice"; like, so fucking what if it is or isn't, does it even matter? If it was a choice would libs suddenly become homophobic? What even is the end goal for this kind of reasoning? It's cool if males want to wear a dress, but only if it doesn't turn them (or others) on? What if I have a six pack and jog everyday because I think I look good in the mirror, you gonna ban me from being fit? Are we going to stop women from doing something they find erotic too? Should we ban reproduction because some people like pregnancy sex?

 

>>1890713
>Let me just say that quite a few powerful men patronize femdoms… [the femdoms should] inoculate them with propaganda when they are at their neediest and most open.

Not a chance in hell you're going to legitimately turn porky into a communist during sex lol. You did get me thinking however - I think a communist financial dominatrix could have a real chance of success. Like instead of having her "paypigs" buy her high heels etc. and then taunt them about it, instead she would make them donate large amounts of money to a communist party and then taunt them about it.

 

>>1878127
>FGM is a bullshit made up word. Women in parts of Africa voluntarily engage in genital modifications. The practice isn't forced or coerced
Literally kys. Get your cock up to thoughts of raping women surgically rendered incapable of receiving sexual pleasure, or whatever is it that you get off to, and then apply a boxcutter to the base of the cock and saw it off at the base.
Jesus fucking Christ, just mention sex on this site and the worst creeps go crawling out of the woods.

 

>>1891738
Conversion addiction is a disease. Get help

 

>>1891738
>Like instead of having her "paypigs" buy her high heels etc. and then taunt them about it, instead she would make them donate large amounts of money to a communist party and then taunt them about it.
Buying high heels for a sexy woman makes caveman brain lose blood and hand over the cash. Donating more money than designer high heels cost to a communist party makes caveman brain hyperactive and go "I'm in this to get off, not to fucking help a professional dominatrix with her side political projects".
It's nice that coomers are self-reporting by thinking that sex mixes with leftist propaganda.

 

>>1891762
>Conversion addiction
literally what
>>1891766
Yeah it probably wouldn't actually work as a fundraising method but I still want to see someone try for the memes. And who knows, maybe there are one or two megaporkies out there that would cough up the cash to be called a bourgeois parasite etc. I don't get off on femdom or findom, I just find this specific concept amusing

 

File: 1719028853108.png (801.89 KB, 1280x720, ClipboardImage.png)

>>1891766
Interrogation scenes are a common offering on the professional domme's menu. It is interesting to consider their potential use-value of lay psychologists with no scruples and transferable skills in a revolutionary action, however, and whether you would rather have them on your side than the bourgeoisie's.

 

>>1891868
You don't get off to femdom? What are you, gay?
>>1891766
Designer clothing can be resold

 

>>1877853
>It´s a thread about porn may mays
>We literally have on this very leftypol website threads dedicated to admiring the female youth fertility
>The statists are already preparing themselves to censor left and right once they are declared vozhd in their head.

What the fuck.

 

>>1892011
>What the fuck.
Blame hte Jannies. They should have deleted this nonsense 2 weeks ago.

 


 

>>1892011
>We literally have on this very leftypol website threads dedicated to admiring the female youth fertility
Uh?

 

>>1877982

it left my dick all fucked-up looking so i'd call it mutilated. image search penile skin bridges

 

>>1891234
> What if we did good capitalism?

 

>>1892031
/Anime/ it´s 5 blocks down the road, first floor.

 

Here, now fight for my amusement

 

>>1892727
P1 and P2 are good though

 

>>1892727
This but unironically

 

>>1877853
All sex is desublimating and therefore oppressive. Anyone who peddles it is working toward bourgeois interests.
>>1878017
>free love and sexual revolution of the boomers
What did they achieve aside from smoking a lot of hash?
>sex is the most natural thing in the world
So are parasitic worms and bubonic plague.

 

>>1892727
this is literally just political lesbianism

 

>>1892876
Pretty sure sex happens much more often than bubonic plague or parasitic worms

 

>>1892971
Only because people choose it. That doesn't make it more natural.

 

>>1892974
Reminder: the concept of Nature (physis) comes from ancient greece and is basically equal with moral goodness, which is why catholicism later institutes "natural law" as part of its doctrine. This is also where the notion of the "unnatural" comes from, especially where it concerns sexual behaviour.
So "Nature" is an old concept that has lost validity today.

 

>>1892979
What. You mean, parasites and diseases aren't natural, according to ancient boylovers and catholics?

 

>>1892985
>>1892985
Universally in all societies disease was treated as demonic or sinful influence. Socrates even makes a remark once that the separation of the soul amd body in medical practice is extremely unwise.
Today we still call mental illness "demons".
So, no. All that belonged to Nature belonged to the will of God. Things which broke the laws of nature like witchcraft were considered unnatural for obvious reasons.

 

>>1892979
The logic behind this is that "nature" is a divine creation by god. If that's what you believe it makes sense to think that nature = good. If you are secular and think that nature just is, and that things like diseases are basically random then it doesn't really make sense to you. "Natural law" to christians is literally god's design.

 

>>1892992
Yes but this question of the "unnatural" was always debated. I always think of liebniz' solution that evil was only pure negation, and thus all creation is good, but just in degrees of its accordance toward the "positive" essence of things. So to liebniz for example the essence of temperature would be heat, where cold would be its negation.
Thus in some way, evil did not exist in itself, and so had no nature of its own except to negate.
Schopenhauer expertly reverses liebniz however by seeing that all things at rest fall to the lowering of temperature. Evil is the nature of things, and it is goodness which is preserved by negation.
So Nature here also accords to Essence, where to a lot of christians, there is no Evil, there is only "separation from God".

 


>>1892991
>>1892979
>>1892998

Protestantism has a very idealistic/non-materialist view of nature and morality.
They are not a spiritual religion but a political one.

 


>>1879888
>muh zoomers
>muh boomers

bruh, everything zoomers are oin, millennials and Gen X are doing as well.

>>1878169
>>1878113
>>187816
most whores in the forst world arent really poor but theyre averse to elbow grease.

 

>>1892979
That was my point. It doesn't matter how "natural" something is. That is no standard by which to determine how good or bad it is.
Sex is an oppressive desublimation and can therefore only serve ruling class interests. It also commodifies the human body as and object of consumption and the logistics of actually doing it produce contradictory consent structures which can never be resolved.
In the past it might have been necessary for reproduction, but that is no longer the case with technologies such as artificial insemination and IVF. IVF also allows screening for genetic diseases such that children conceived by it in the future may be healthier than those conceived by intercourse.
Under the circumstances I can't see any justification for sex.

 

>>1893033
most mentally stable anti-sex work leftist

 

>>1893036
I'm not just talking about sex work. I'm talking about sex itself. Please name one good reason sex should still be practised in a world where IVF exists.

 

>>1893051
Intimacy and recreation

 

>>1893055
>Intimacy
Please explain why this would be desirable outside of a bourgeois nuclear family. What do you get from intimate relationships that you could not get from communal ones?
>recreation
This goes back to my point about desublimation. In a world of alienation you cannot express yourself in your work, so a separate world of recreation is created to compensate.

 

>>1893123
Nta but what part of "full and free development of the individual in society" do you think your social gray goo theory is fit for?

 

>>1893123
>In a world of alienation you cannot express yourself in your work, so a separate world of recreation is created to compensate.
Wrong. Disposable time existed before work. You're a work fetishist and I bet you're painfully middle class too.

 

>>1893123
How is sex like a gas turning into a solid? You're just trying to sound smart. You have an aversion to sex and find and find it gross but instead of keeping it to yourself you seek to impose your aesthetic tastes on society. I won't call you a fascist because you're coming in good faith but this is an anti-people policy. People can have sex communally, it's called polyamory and orgies.

 

>>1893148
No I'm asking the question, seems more like a liquids turning into two or three liquids to me unless there's procreation, then you could argue it's a freezing process

 

>>1893137
All of it. Full and free development can only occur when the individual consciously avoids false liberation.
>>1893141
Disposable time is not the same as recreation. You can rest your body and conserve calories without indulging in substitute activities to make up for the meaningless waste of your labour.
>>1893143
I'm not referring to the chemical process, but to the term used by Freud and later Marcuse. Sublimation is the strain placed on the individual as a result of repressing desires for the sake of society. Desublimation would therefore be releasing that tension.
Marcuse identified many forms of desublimation as themselves repressive, because they serve to distract from the cause of repression and avoid examining it. Psychosexual desublimation is a particular problem, as populations subject to it tend to be much less concerned with political freedom.
It can even be directly weaponised, as in the case of the IDF broadcasting pornography in Ramallah to demoralise the Palestinian population.
>People can have sex communally, it's called polyamory and orgies.
Well this makes a lot more sense than the idea of intimacy, but it carries the same danger of introducing false liberation (as evidenced by countless hippie free love movements) not to mention physical risks of infection. What is so important about sex that could justify the risk?

 

>>1893176
>but it carries the same danger of introducing false liberation
Buy socdem, get Christian capitalism and no refunds

 

>>1893220
Marx famously read zero religious texts ever in his entire life but somehow gets a pass from leftists for not having done his homework.

If you buy into this bullshit you also have to accept the other crap Marx said about religion such as the Jewish god actually being money and how Jewish characteristics are huckstering and scamming.

 

>>1892915
Obvio
>>1893380
You don't need to read a specific text to -
understand the logic of something completely different
He's obviously right on the money there.
>If you buy into this you also have to accept the other
Not stringent logic, first of all
I won't even try with the second part of that half-formed thought.

 

>thread about production and proletarian organization
<3 replies, gets made once a month or so

>thread about consumption and culture

<500 replies, happens at least weekly

it do be like that

 

>>1893380
that essay was about capitalism and how the things attributed to judaism are actually how the bourgeois in general behave, did you even read it?

 

>>1893448
>>thread about consumption and culture
This is only a problem when it's just leftoid """""""""""""""""analysis"""""""""""""""""", the discussion in the side boards is at its best when it isn't pseud shit.

 

>>1893448
what's great is that this is self-fulfilling: when you see a good thread, you often know not to reply because it's doomed to die.
(you also know not to make high effort posts in a trivial thread, since people will usually ignore those too.)

 

>>1891317
The very suggestion that communism is not some fairy tale vision to 'improve lives' within bourgeois society is enough to set a LOT of leftoids off. Even the idea that communist society itself won't be like fucking Star Trek just because classes and money got abolished is haram. Like I think people will be better (objectively for the proletariat) but the idea of a utopia is just plain silly.

 

>>1893466
>Even the idea that communist society itself won't be like fucking Star Trek just because classes and money got abolished is haram.

Irony?

 

>>1893473
For starters we don't concretely know what communism society will be like beyond its basic foundations that everyone already knows about if they've read Marx. Besides the eventual emancipation of humanity as a whole as a byproduct of the emancipation of the proletariat bothering with details is just useless utopia-cooking (in some cases literally, as people act like it's going to be a "perfect" (?) world).

 

Why has this thread not been moved to si/b/eria already.

All porn shit should go there. Stop screwing up the main board with your fetishes retards.

 

>>1893477
Everybody understands the general concept, abolish class relations, end to capitalism, etc. An end of capitalism means an end to capitalist relations of power. In almost all dictatorships of the proletariat prostitution was prohibited or limited, for it is a result of capitalist relations of power and exploitation, leading to the creation of black markets, the natural acumulation of capital, and many other negative impacts. The prohibition of prostituion in the dictatorship of the proletariat, and by default in communism, is only the logical conclusion. Communism entails the end of comodification of products, the end of profit and the end of relations of exploitation.

 

>>1893480
You did not read any of the responses of the thread. This is not a porn thread.

 

>>1893220
I would add that Christianity has also tended to tolerate brothels in the past, so long as they are not in the "respectable" parts of town. IIRC Augustine even recommended vice quarters as part of town planning, so that all the vice would be contained in one area (where the ruling class don't have to see it).
>>1893380
You don't even need to read the Bible to see the historical accuracy of other Anon's quote, although if you do you'll be able to see the sophist structure of the text that allows every Christian to talk out of both sides of their mouth.
>>1893448
Whether to indulge in sex (or any other vice) is a pretty important component of organisation. I think these discussions need to be had.
>>1893481
>In almost all dictatorships of the proletariat prostitution was prohibited or limited, for it is a result of capitalist relations of power and exploitation
This is good, but I don't think it goes far enough as they still generally normalised marriage, sex and families. A much better solution would be to live in communal arrangements where all childcare is a shared duty, eliminating all traces of capitalist relations.
Women could volunteer for (fully compensated) impregnation with the latest medical technology, eliminating the need for sex and thereby stamping out the concept of coupling (the last vestige of the bourgeois family). Newborns could be deliberately switched and anonymised at birth, so no one can treat their own offspring with favouritism.

 

>>1893448
It be like that because capitalism alienates people from production and worker organization (by design) and encourages us to be engrossed in consumption, since if it's been commodified it's safe for us to be preoccupied with it.

 

>>1893518
>eliminating the need for sex and thereby stamping out the concept of coupling (the last vestige of the bourgeois family). Newborns could be deliberately switched and anonymised at birth, so no one can treat their own offspring with favouritism.

What even is the utility of that. Sex doesnt lead to the "bourgeoisie family". And what about male prostitution? The whole point was to minimize suffering and the need of humiliation and degradation of these destitutes for income. Prostituion is not the fault of the individual alone, but the whole estructure that makes the job possible, be they media services, brothels, websites, and ultimately capitalism.

 

>>1893527
>What even is the utility of that.
Levelling of relations so that no private units can develop again. Sublimation of the individual to permanently reinforce revolutionary consciousness.
>Sex doesnt lead to the "bourgeoisie family".
Sex causes people to form couples (or maybe thruples or quadruples etc if you're polyamorous). In any case there is now a group of people with closer ties to each other than to the broader community. Even where free love is attempted these small units tend to form (and even then they have a lot of problems with jealousy).
Add parentage (and inevitable parental favouritism) to the mix and you have adults seeking to control resources to give their own children an advantage. This happened even in communist societies where families were allowed (the resources might not be capital, but jobs or party positions - the dynamic is the same).
If a commune could eliminate sex and anonymise parentage these problems would not exist.
>what about male prostitution?
What about it? Sex with men produces the same problems as sex with women.
>Prostituion is not the fault of the individual alone, but the whole estructure that makes the job possible
Correct. Now just extend that same principle to sex in general and to families. If we had communal control of our immediate environments there would be no need to build private home environments and seek solace in private relationships. If our work provided balanced exercise of mind and body there would be no need for sex as recreation. If childcare were shared by the whole community there would be no need for parenting.
The structures of present society generate a desire for sex and family formation, but these are not goods in themselves. They are simply desublimating activities that offer the illusion of liberation.

 

>>1893569
>Christian self-mortification ideology
>reduction of the worker's condition to the minimum
>the absolute elimination of all gradients
Capitalist idealism

 

>>1893617
>Christian self-mortification ideology
Christians have historically reserved the power of communal celibacy (and its collective bargaining power) for priests and monastics, while encouraging everyone else to have sex, form families and participate in feudal or capitalist modes of production. I am proposing the opposite - everyone should form celibate communes so that ideologies like Christianity will have no power over you.
>reduction of the worker's condition to the minimum
This would only be the case if the work itself were alienating. Have you ever worked on something that you completely owned and controlled? Some computer programming, a small plot of land, a diy project? You don't walk around thinking, "I just can't wait to finish this and get back to sex/drugs/partying". The work IS recreation.
Notice how corporate directors don't mind working 16 hours a day? It's not just the money, it's the fact that they own and control their work. Their work IS recreation. Right now this is a privilege of a few, but in a worker controlled society it can be available to everyone.

 

>>1893665
>I am encouraging the reification of Christian sexual mysticism
No, people who need ideology are more likely to switch than quit. You are only replacing Christianity with one of its derivatives, German Idealism.
>alienating
Young Marxist trying to posit a return to holiness, hmm?
<In 1845 they jointly wrote the German Ideology, a work (unpublished during their lifetimes) that was intended as a settling of accounts not only with the “radical” Young Hegelian philosophers, but also, as Marx later wrote, “with our former philosophical conscience” (MECW, 29:264). In this work, as in the Theses on Feuerbach that Marx wrote shortly before the German Ideology, Marx and Engels criticized in particular the philosophical conception of a “human essence” and of “alienation.” The really existing social relations under which people live and work became the object of investigation. Subsequently, the concept of a human species-being or essence no longer surfaces in Marx’s work, and he only rarely and vaguely speaks of alienation. In discussions concerning Marx, it is a point of contention as to whether he actually discarded the theory of alienation or whether he simply no longer placed it at the foreground of his work. The debate as to whether there is a conceptual break between the writings of the “young” and those of the “old” Marx is primarily concerned with this question.
>Have you ever worked on something that you completely owned and controlled? Some computer programming, a small plot of land, a diy project?
Several times, and I am almost always primarily interested in the production of some particular use-value by way of it, or more rarely, in developing my knowledge and capability in the arts and sciences of matter. Those arts and sciences include the erotic arts and sciences. I think you need to learn to be more ashamed of your right-wing cultural pieties, however.
>>1893665
>Notice how corporate directors don't mind working 16 hours a day
When most of that work is
>sex/drugs/partying.
That is the tell that you are simply promoting Protestant ethics and are opposed to the emancipation of the working class.

 

>>1893691
>Christian sexual mysticism
Why does it necessitate Christianity or mysticism? Marcuse understood the danger of desublimation without being a christian and Unwin studied the effects of sexual activity on civilization from a data driven approach to history.
>Those arts and sciences include the erotic arts and sciences.
Then I have to ask, what is the use of these erotic arts and sciences? What is produced by them (that cannot be done better using IVF) and what do they contribute to genuine liberation?
>right-wing cultural pieties
What is right wing about eschewing non-productive pleasure indulgence? Surely the right wing benefits from the precise opposite, since the production of pleasure for its own sake is easy to commodify.
>Protestant ethics
Well that's just blatantly the opposite of what I said. Protestants elevate the nuclear family to the status of natural law, while I am against it.
>opposed to the emancipation of the working class
How can I be opposed to it when everything I'm talking about is for the purpose of strengthening resolve and revolutionary consciousness? Imagine what could be achieved if all the time and resources currently put into hedonistic pursuits were redirected toward class-conscious activities. Imagine what could subsequently be achieved if it remained that way permanently.

 

>>1893764
Why are you desperate for your asexuality to be valued? Chapo's already got you.
>danger of desublimation
Dangers to who or what, and what if we want them damaged or destroyed? What if they are the things that Marxians or Communists should want endangered?
>Unwin
>le civilization
Reactionary

 

>>1893793
>Why are you desperate for your asexuality to be valued?
I don't care about asexuality being valued for itself. I only want to question why sexuality is valued in the first place. When I ask people (including in this thread) I usually get one of three responses. Either they claim it is recreational, or that it helps them bond with another person, or they just call me reactionary.
These are the same kind of responses you will commonly get when asking an addict why they value their habit. If sex is as beneficial as most people claim it is, I want to know why they cannot define this benefit in concrete material terms.
>Dangers to who or what
To everyone. As I mentioned earlier, the IDF have been known to broadcast pornography when occupying an area. Western marketers jumped on the liberation movements of the 1960s to produce the sexually "liberated" hippie consumer. Do a word count of major media outlets in the 2010s and you'll notice they begin switching to sexual and gender "liberation" issues right at the height of the occupy movement.
I don't think these are all just coincidences. There are clearly powers at work who understand this is the Achilles' heel of the left.
>Unwin
>Reactionary
I'm talking about his data, not his politics. Like early rocket science was mostly developed by Nazis - it still objectively works and can be used by anyone. My point was simply that he didn't need mysticism or religion to conclude that sex disempowers people, only historical data.

 

>>1893815
Well, maybe it is because you actually promote reactionary ideals.
>concrete material terms
What it does is make a person less vulnerable to domination and enchantment.
We don't do vulgar materialism here.
>addiction
The favorite rhetorical double-bind of the reactionary who is very smart. I might dare say they're addicted to it.
>To everyone
Lol, another christoid trying to earn salvation tokens. No, you really need to not post here until you have read Origin of the Family.

 

>>1893823
>less vulnerable to domination and enchantment
How can it make you less vulnerable when you are practising a behaviour rife with domination and enchantment dynamics? Are you suggesting some kind of vaccine effect?
>rhetorical double-bind
There is no double-bind here. If you can explain the material benefits it's not an addiction. For example, if someone claimed food is an addiction you could simply point out that it is necessary to live. I have never heard anyone do this for recreational sex.
>christoid
>Origin of the Family
Once again, I am not a christian and I am against nuclear families.

 

>>1893830
Which political streamers do you watch, because it's clear you don't read

 

You won’t get much real engagement with this thread because ~85% of those who lurk/post on Leftypol are fat losers with behavioral addictions (such as the subject of this very thread) and are often also YIMBYs who roll over even when their basic well-meaning gut instincts are rightfully offended by reprehensible things.
Oh, and any argument you make against their , self-destructive tendencies is just dismissed as moralism.

 

>>1893856
It's difficult to find political streams that aren't just hedonism and idpol. I did watch Maoist Rebel News on Youtube for a while.
>>1893867
How do you find a serious group who aren't like this? I want to connect with more people IRL.

 

>>1893867
> You won’t get much real engagement with this thread
> 142 unique IPs

 

>>1893875
>>1893867
You can form a Junior Anti-Sex League and be smug and retarded together

 

>>1878104
>Japanese communist party pushing porn bans
big drama in jp land is they are currently snitching out AV posters to the police and have had them removed, porn obsessed twitter commies are very much the minority. is there an active communist party that isn't overwhelmingly anti-porn?

 

>>1878071
>Many of the male gay performers are straight men who do it because it is more profitable than straight porn
>or because they are coerced into it.
These are synonyms, brother

 

>>1893877
142 unique IPs and like 130 of those are coombrains

 

>>1893875
Apply to your local post office if you live in the United States. The only unambiguously respectable federal agency in America is the USPS, it’s even got a union.

 

>NOOOOO to be a Marxist you have to be a hedonistic degenerate!!!!!

The massive commercialization of porn has been a disaster for mankind. It’s created a huge social beast that no generation ever had to deal with. It’s one of many issues in the modern dystopia

 

>>1894021
pornography is the acceleration of social acceptance for groups of people who traditionally had no sex appeal. i think it's very progressive, barring the fact that it's controlled by capitalist for-profit media producers and not amateurs. tasteful pornography should be plastered on every wall and billboard instead of the regular ads that show up on them both to normalize nudism without forcing it upon anyone as well as to abolish the advertising industry. we should even retvrn to greek statues everywhere if possible.

 

>>1894018
The USPS is also one of the first modern State Owned Enterprises

 

>>1894050
Equating greek statues with porn is horrendous

 

>>1894059
The only difference is vibes, those Greek statues were monuments to slavery and conquest

 

>>1877908
this sounds more like reactive exaggeration.

Also I doubt that the people there didnt have any sexual aggression before the Internet.

 

>>1894306
I can definitely imagine porn gave the men new ideas though

 

>>1894317
Probably so but again, I dont think they were innocet before.
Like cmon. I bet the elders there probably have some kinky fetishes that hey dont tell the ypungins about.
Theyre just upset that the ypungins can find out without having to sneak a peek at the elders.

Again, its all about control.
Its never about genuine concern for the youth.

 

>>1894323
>NOOOOOO EVERYONE HAS TO BE AS CORRUPT AND DEPRAVED AS ME
>PORN DIDN'T CORRUPT THEM THEY WERE ALREADY NOT INNOCENT ANYMORE AND BESIDES IT'S A GOOD THING THAT THEY GOT IT SO NOW THEY CAN LEARN MORE STUFF ANYWAYS
holy anarkiddie


Unique IPs: 149

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / edu / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ wiki / twitter / cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]