Who is trying to shut down Los Angeles porn?

Originally posted by Wolf321
reply to post by ErroneousDylan

 

A parent is still responsible for their kid 24/7. That is an issue for another thread.

I don't want, nor should the government be regulating art, be it porn, action movies, comedies, paintings, or music. If they want to rate it, fine. If they want to set workplace conditions that don't affect the art, fine. Testing the performers is one thing, requiring condoms, gloves or dental dams is a destructive of the art itself.

It's not about destroying "art" (Lol please). It's about advocating safety and instilling the "more right" thing to do in people's minds.

According to definition, pornography is "the explicit portrayal of sexual subject matter for the purposes of sexual arousal and erotic satisfaction." Not art. It can be interpreted as art by some individuals, but that is up to them. Just as a homicidal person could view the violent murders of his victims as "beautiful" and "artistic". So, should the government not censor real videos of violent murders just because somebody would think it was snuffing out art?

No, they censor such things as they are unhealthy for the human mind.

As I said earlier, it is baby steps towards healthier public-media.

Originally posted by Wolf321
reply to post by ErroneousDylan

 

A parent is still responsible for their kid 24/7. That is an issue for another thread.

I don't want, nor should the government be regulating art, be it porn, action movies, comedies, paintings, or music. If they want to rate it, fine. If they want to set workplace conditions that don't affect the art, fine. Testing the performers is one thing, requiring condoms, gloves or dental dams is a destructive of the art itself.

edit on 6-3-2012 by Wolf321 because: (no reason given)

The art? People watch porn as a masturbatory aid. If a condom turns you off, I think you're looking at the wrong participant... unless you like guys, in which case I don't know how to address your concern.

Originally posted by ErroneousDylan
It's not about destroying "art" (Lol please). It's about advocating safety and instilling the "more right" thing to do in people's minds.
...
No, they censor such things as they are unhealthy for the human mind.

As I said earlier, it is baby steps towards healthier public-media.

I see, so we are advocating government sanctioned brainwash..er...conditioning. A happy world where the government tells you what to think and what is "more right." Again, not the governments place. Look how they screw that sort of thing up on a daily basis now.

According to definition, pornography is "the explicit portrayal of sexual subject matter for the purposes of sexual arousal and erotic satisfaction." Not art. It can be interpreted as art by some individuals, but that is up to them. Just as a homicidal person could view the violent murders of his victims as "beautiful" and "artistic". So, should the government not censor real videos of violent murders just because somebody would think it was snuffing out art?

The act of murder is a crime in any sense, and separate from the act of filming it. With regards to any such film of a murder, we see that sort of thing on the internet every day. No, I don't want the government coming on the internet and shutting down sites or removing videos just because they contain footage of a murder. Detest the act, not the record of the act.

Art is art. The nature of it is completely subjective. Porn is art.

reply to post by DaTroof


You think people don't masturbate to non-porn movies? A film made by people to show off their talent is art, be it a documentary or a fantasy. A porn film can be straight up about sex, or can have a story and like all movies, varying degrees of acting ability, costumes, set design, make-up, special effects and editing.

Some people find some art offensive or tasteless. Others enjoy it.

If there is a story about two aliens or a husband and wife wanting to get it on, a condom detracts from the scene. Period.

When writers and editors decide to not edit out ropes in flying scenes, you can argue for condoms not impacting a porn.

reply to post by XXX777
The government can take my condom when they can pry it from my cold, sticky, dead han- er. . . . um, ew.

Sorry.

reply to post by Wolf321


Ah yes, you got me there. The government is out to get us because they believe in safe sex! Oh woe unto me that pornstars must now use condoms and condone to such an unclean act! I only say it is unclean because, as you stated, the government is all for it and we know that the government's true plan is to destroy everything! /sarcasm.

Go look at my first reply to you on page 2. You talk as if "government sanctioned brainwashing" is harmful (which it is), yet you advocate another form of much more "artistic" brainwashing (i.e. porn). Irony.

The other fact of the matter is: such snuff films of murder are in fact a crime themselves. It is illegal to make a film of real murder. It is also illegal to own them.

As you said, these things are subjective. You can not simply say that "porn is art" because it is a dynamic object. It may be art to someone but is also a masturbatory aid to another person and not viewed as anything more.

It's not just LA- it's California.
THEY ARE OUT OF CONTROL AND SOMEBODY NEEDS TO PUT A STOP TO THE BS GOING ON THERE.

Cali is a PERFECT example of the hot mess MONSTROSITY that results from hard core liberals running the show.

But LA is probably the worst:
i.e. their new laws regarding beaches-
No frisbees or balls (unless it's an inflatable volleyball)
AND IT'S NOW ILLEGAL TO DIG A DAMN HOLE DEEPER THAN 18" (a foot and a half)!!!

WHAT
THE
FBOMB
CALIFORNIA?!?!

There is even a bill being proposed to BAN SMOKING OUTSIDE,
ON YOUR OWN PROPERTY!!!!!

Somebody stop these aholes
PLEASE?!?!?
PLEASE PLEASE PLEEEEEEASE!!!!!

(NOTE- I don't even live in California, but this BS makes my brain explode! I cannot begin to imagine how the Californians feel!)

ENOUGH ALREADY!

Originally posted by Wolf321
reply to post by DaTroof

 

You think people don't masturbate to non-porn movies? A film made by people to show off their talent is art, be it a documentary or a fantasy. A porn film can be straight up about sex, or can have a story and like all movies, varying degrees of acting ability, costumes, set design, make-up, special effects and editing.

Some people find some art offensive or tasteless. Others enjoy it.

If there is a story about two aliens or a husband and wife wanting to get it on, a condom detracts from the scene. Period.

When writers and editors decide to not edit out ropes in flying scenes, you can argue for condoms not impacting a porn.

I was 13 once, and frequently pleased myself to music videos or risque parts of shows and movies. 14.4 AOL didn't make it easy to view pics, and just forget about any kind of video. So yes, I know that people masturbate to things that are not pornography. However, I haven't met one mentally stable person that watches pornography and DOESN'T masturbate to it, regardless of plot, scenery, camerawork, etc. Can those things be appreciated? Certainly, but at some point the viewer is going to get turned on and please themselves.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by XXX777

 

The government can take my condom when they can pry it from my cold, sticky, dead han- er. . . . um, ew.

Sorry.

You are confused. The government is not trying to take your condom. It is trying to force condoms onto actors.

But anyway, perhaps you can answer this.... if identical twins have sex with each other is it gay?

Originally posted by DaTroof

Originally posted by Wolf321
reply to post by DaTroof

 

You think people don't masturbate to non-porn movies? A film made by people to show off their talent is art, be it a documentary or a fantasy. A porn film can be straight up about sex, or can have a story and like all movies, varying degrees of acting ability, costumes, set design, make-up, special effects and editing.

Some people find some art offensive or tasteless. Others enjoy it.

If there is a story about two aliens or a husband and wife wanting to get it on, a condom detracts from the scene. Period.

When writers and editors decide to not edit out ropes in flying scenes, you can argue for condoms not impacting a porn.

I was 13 once, and frequently pleased myself to music videos or risque parts of shows and movies. 14.4 AOL didn't make it easy to view pics, and just forget about any kind of video. So yes, I know that people masturbate to things that are not pornography. However, I haven't met one mentally stable person that watches pornography and DOESN'T masturbate to it, regardless of plot, scenery, camerawork, etc. Can those things be appreciated? Certainly, but at some point the viewer is going to get turned on and please themselves.

No kidding. I bet that scene in Salvage 1 when the rocket finally blasted off was the most masturbated to scene in 1979.

reply to post by ErroneousDylan


Films depicting murder or people being killed are not illegal. Making one may be, but not the film itself. If that were the case, the FBI would be shutting down websites left and right.

Originally posted by XXX777

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by XXX777

 

The government can take my condom when they can pry it from my cold, sticky, dead han- er. . . . um, ew.

Sorry.

You are confused. The government is not trying to take your condom. It is trying to force condoms onto actors.

But anyway, perhaps you can answer this.... if identical twins have sex with each other is it gay?

I'm often confused.
Sorry, was just being silly. Government control, because they know better. Until they don't. Then they just hire contractors.

If twins engage in um, I'll get back to you.

Originally posted by Wolf321
reply to post by ErroneousDylan

 

Films depicting murder or people being killed are not illegal. Making one may be, but not the film itself. If that were the case, the FBI would be shutting down websites left and right.

If the intent of the murder was to film it for viewing and selling then it becomes a "snuff film", and thusly illegal. The reason such "shock sites" do not get shut down for violent or disturbing content is that there is no proof that it is real. Rather, a "false-snuff film".

However, that is off-topic.

Originally posted by XXX777

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by XXX777

 

The government can take my condom when they can pry it from my cold, sticky, dead han- er. . . . um, ew.

Sorry.

But anyway, perhaps you can answer this.... if identical twins have sex with each other is it gay?

i believe that would be called "twincest" ha ha ha ha ha
that's a whole new fetish.

-subfab

i wonder how many actors and actresses want condoms but are too afraid to say something?

they could lose money if they are denied parts in films. a law requiring condoms may not be a bad thing.

-subfab

Originally posted by subfab

Originally posted by XXX777

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by XXX777

 

The government can take my condom when they can pry it from my cold, sticky, dead han- er. . . . um, ew.

Sorry.

But anyway, perhaps you can answer this.... if identical twins have sex with each other is it gay?

i believe that would be called "twincest" ha ha ha ha ha
that's a whole new fetish.

-subfab

Perfect.

In Los Angeles, film ''Angels & Poo Holes''.

In Miami, film ''Twincest Unsheathed''.

condoms sucks and all...but i'm praying they don't make it illegal to do porn naked...then it would be pointless...

Boy am I blushing now.

I read the topic too fast and I thought the OP stated someone was trying to shut down Los Angeles. Then I come in and realize that its about porn. Oops. My bad.

ok... so.. adult porn stars have to wear condoms or they will be violating the law?

but teen moms on mtv dont have to follow the same laws?

that makes complete sense .. thats much safer.


bless you if you agree with this. you are saving us all

What is this "porn" you speak of?
Never heard Of it... 😏