Pornography: What exactly is it?
The question is straight forward, but defining it is altogether another matter.
The question is straight forward, but defining it is altogether another matter.
Most think it’s a dirty word, and will not even say the word, without really knowing what it actually means.
Let’s explore this further. Is it showing the naked body or a couple having sexual intercourse together?
Some would say, yes, that could well be the case, but what is wrong with showing the human form and the way we procreate? I would argue that there is nothing wrong with showing our bodies or in having sex or showing the sex act in picture or on film, our bodies are but the house we live in, and there are only two types, male and female. Please, if you find a third let me know.
Our bodies were around long before clothes ever showed on the scene, and when we did start to clothes ourselves, it had nothing to do with covering up our nakedness, and more to do with keeping us warm, later still, to mark us out as different, similar to painting our bodies or tattooing ourselves. It was simply for adornment, and no one looked twice at a naked man or woman before then, frankly, it was the norm, no excitement there.
Let’s look at how the Collins dictionary defines it:
Pornography: noun, 1. writing, pictures, films designed to stimulate sexual excitement.
2. The production of such material [that causes, can cause offence] shortened to porn or porno. The word is Greek “pornographos” writing of harlot from pornē + graphein, to write.
Not a lot there, writing, pictures, films, what is excitement to one can be distasteful to another. We are down here to personal preference, some foods we like, other, we can’t stand, even the smell of some foods are enough to make one retch.
A few people I know hate the smell of fish, but personally, I find the smell makes me feel hungry. So what you read into a photo or film is purely in your own mind, and even if it stimulates, is it wrong to have that feeling? It is after all, what keep our species alive, if male and female were no longer attractive to each other, then where would the human race be? To procreate is a basic human, animal function. We all do it, and if a photo or film gives us a little help, is not that a good thing?
I argue, to look upon a naked man or woman cannot be wrong. The human body is beautiful, it shows us in our natural state, it shows us for what are, all equals. Or again, to see a picture of two people making love, everyone does it, where is the harm? Perhaps we should talk about this at lot more to our kids, and show them pictures, more so, before they become sexually active and resort to covert activity because... you can guess the rest.
Films which shows the naked body, so what? I’m not talking here, masochistic photos, where sexual pleasure is derived from pain, humiliation, or domination. Neither rape, children included, who are shown in various sexual poses, which is exploitation of the vilest kind.
That is not pornography, but a delight in torture, an enjoyment in the suffering of others, and paedophilia which is the exploitation and deprivation of gaining delight in destroying innocent children, robbing them of their childhood, scarring them for life. No one can argue that case, and who would wish to defend these vile people?
(Coming shortly, I will be blogging about: “Should those people, rapists, child abusers, forcefully be castrated and the sexual urges with drives these acts removed before they are allowed back into society. Join me as a "Follower" and watch for this blog!)
I’m discussing here about showing consenting adults making love together on film or in photos, tell me where the harm is, I’m all ears. The prudes will state: “It still excites and gives the wrong impression.” In Victorian times, many believed that the open naked legs of a table could excite, and it is in good taste that the legs should be covered.
The point I am making, it is down to what you think, or what society thinks, and it has nothing to do with photos or films. It’s what the great majority believe, because in many cases, society is told it is wrong, and yes, you got it, they believe and accept it to be the case, without giving it enough thought. Advertise a lie enough, and as George Orwell believed, it becomes the truth.
Let me have your views on the subject, and what you believe constitutes Pornography, let the debate begin and watch for my next blog on, forceful castration of rapists and child abusers. Should we or should we not castrate?
Additional information
See web sites linked you myself:
1. “The Tour” ISBN: 978-1-60693-682-5
www.strategicbookpublishing.com/TheTour.html
www.strategicbookpublishing.com/TheTour.html
2. My blog page: “roytomkinson.blogspot.com” CHECK IT OUT ON GOOGLE.
3. Web page: “Of Boys, Men and Mountains” ISBN: 0862438683
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=2lFm86R3YRQC&dq=roy+tomkinson&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=JqWUXfVvA2&sig=5BuFZcHGwpVBp0j8_QL03yOyWQw&hl=en&ei=5FMISsTjGKDUjAe91uDQBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2#PPP1,M1
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=2lFm86R3YRQC&dq=roy+tomkinson&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=JqWUXfVvA2&sig=5BuFZcHGwpVBp0j8_QL03yOyWQw&hl=en&ei=5FMISsTjGKDUjAe91uDQBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2#PPP1,M1
4. “Anger Child”: 978095597360-4
http://www.gwales.com/rating/?isbn=9780955973604&tsid=3
Also, you’ll see a number of blogs and articles on the web if you search my name “Roy Tomkinson” on the web, please feel free to email me, and to comment on any one of them.
http://www.gwales.com/rating/?isbn=9780955973604&tsid=3
Also, you’ll see a number of blogs and articles on the web if you search my name “Roy Tomkinson” on the web, please feel free to email me, and to comment on any one of them.
Castrate them them all, every single one of them, and still keep them in prison.
ReplyDeleteA radical but effective response I must say, but Anonymous, what if a mistake is made? Do you mean a permanent castration, or a temporary one using tables etc?
ReplyDeleteSomething that can be reversed!
There are several problems with pornography. Firstly is the issue of exploitation. You mention the 'female' form. It did not automaticaly occure to you did it that there could be male pornograpgy. This is with good reason for the vast majority of 'pornographic' literature is to do with the feamle body any yes, like it or not females are still far more easily subject to exploitaion. Some Women may do it voluntarily, many do not. Also it is voluntary if the woman in question has no real option as it is the only way she can feed her family?
ReplyDeleteSecondly, pornograpgy debases the sexual act. It is little to do with erroticism, much to do with titilation. It commodifies the most intimate of acts, one can photograph it, distribute it and hey - charge for it. And it is usualy more to do with mens needs than womens'.
Lastly and most crucialy there is a known correlation between pornography and the more abhorent instances of abuse you have mentioned. I am not saying of course that all men (or even a significant minority) who look at 'dirty magazines' go on to do those things - on the contrary. But a very tiny minority indeed do - they 'graduate' to increasibgly debased forms of pornographic literature, they need increasingly 'hard core' or 'way out' porn to have the same stimulating effect. From the more acceptable (sadly) play boy type, to hard core and ...well who knows what may come next in the hands of a tiny few nutters. While sick individuals read this garbage there will be equaly sick ones happy to supply the stuff.
I have deep reservations regarding porn. Sadly I suspect it may always be with us.
The little old men in white macks dont do any harm but in general I agree. Ban the stinking stuff.
ReplyDeleteHi Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteI have had a few comments anonymously, are you the same person?
Yes, I was thinking mostly of the female, as opposed to the male, but both are equally relevant, but when pornography is mentioned, usually there is a female body somewhere involved, with that comment of yours I agree.
But I disagree when you say some women do not have choice. They can say no, obviously, if they are forced or coerced in anyway, that is tantamount to rape, and I would agree, that is exploitation of the vilest kind and the purpetrators should be caught and punished.
But if a woman, or man, chooses to do it, to show their nakend form in different situations voluntarily for gain, for whatever reason, that is down to them, and they only have themselves to blame, if they are then looked upon as objects of play, rather than as individuals.
I’m not moralising here, just stating an obvious fact.
I think again pornography, it is to do with eroticism and with titillation. I make no distinction, which you seem to suggest they are different. Many people use films and books etc, again, I not commenting on the right of wrong of it. I’m just stating a fact, and it that situation, it harms no one, it may even hold some intrinsic value.
Indeed, many best selling authors relish, and make a good living from out in it, the demand is obviously there.
Where I will agree with you, is that, there is a correlation between pornography, and the more abhorrent acts of deprivation that we hear so much about, which often leads down into a slippery slope, and care needs to be taken in that area.
But we must not forget, or treat the human body, male or female, as something that should forever be covered, and somehow is dirty. It is a wonder of nature, and there is great beauty there, but again, as in most things, it is how the individual looks upon it, that is the deciding factor.
Regards,
Roy.
To suggest that ALL women undertake porn work of their own free will is, with respect, extremely naive and dangerous. Porn in this context is nothing more than a sexual commodity and who best to exploit in this field than women & children. Whilst many women perhaps even the majority may do it believing they have a choice, there is a significant minority who have no choice.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your point that many authors who write about such 'titilating' things and make good money out of it. So do drug dealers make good money out of selling their product. Are you suggesting that is ok also?
Many of the worlds greatest artists and sculptures e.g Raphael, Michaelangelo etc depicted the female form (and male) in all its glory. That was erotic, it had nothing to do with the cheap titilation of which we now discuss and yes, there is a distinction.
I agree that the human form is wonderous, and not to be hidden. Porn however sullies it. It cheapens what is lovely and makes the extremists among society an excuse to exert political pressure to hide it .e.g the Taliban. It gives an excuse for the very thing you are arguing against.