Am I the only person who uses furry porn to continue my pornography addiction while avoiding the guilt of supporting the exploitive pornography industry?

AminoMan said:
Am I the only person who uses furry porn to continue my pornography addiction while avoiding the guilt of supporting the exploitive pornography industry?

I support the exploitive pornography industry, but only as long as it's men being exploited.

AminoMan said:
Am I the only person who uses furry porn to continue my pornography addiction while avoiding the guilt of supporting the exploitive pornography industry?

I just use furry porn to continue my pornography addiction. If you think the porn industry is exploitative, just view amateur porn, I guess? Or just stick to furry porn because it's 10 times better.

AminoMan said:
Am I the only person who uses furry porn to continue my pornography addiction while avoiding the guilt of supporting the exploitative pornography industry?

I don't really go after porn. Pinups, casual nudity and romance are about as far as I go, though I do tag straight up porn sometimes.

If you use a porn tube site that steals all the content, and then use an ad blocker on top of that, are you hurting the exploitive pornography industry?

You should get on this ASAP.

I use furry porn the same way people use Plan 9. To laugh at it.

Though there is the occasional genuinely good story I'll look at.

I don't really consider casual nudity to be porn, as I think it's non-sexual by its very definition. I understand people use it as such, but anything can be used as such depending on the person.

There really isn't any evidence that porn addiction is a thing.

To answer the question though - yes, I view "furry porn" in part to avoid the abuses of IRL pornography, though probably a different set of abuses than you worry about, given different content. That's only one motivator though. I also view it for a bunch of other reasons. I think it has its own merits.

How is porn exploitative if people get payed and are willing?

Chaser said:
How is porn exploitative if people get payed and are willing?

The argument, as I understand it, is twofold:

First, the easy one, is that porn inherently objectifies women. Of course, it also objectifies the men as well, but the vast majority of porn is produced from a male perspective, seeking to fulfill male fantasies, so porn disproportionately objectifies women, making it exploitative of women.

The second argument is that women who were victims of abuse are more likely to enter the porn industry, even if they would rather not. Among the abused, even those who think they're going into the industry willingly and happily are more likely to see it that way only because of their past traumas. As a result, the porn industry continues these victims' previous abuse.

I suspect this would prove to be the wrong forum to discuss the merits or flaws of these arguments, and I'm not the right person to defend them anyways. Especially in the latter case, I inherently dislike blanket arguments that an entire class of persons may be legally incompetent and/or incapable of consent, for invisible reasons. So I offer those only because it was asked.

Chaser said:
How is porn exploitative if people get payed and are willing?

Because the people who view it feel guilty about viewing it thanks to a large number of prudish types out there that want to repress our normal sexual urges.

Chaser said:
How is porn exploitative if people get payed and are willing?

I have heard of situations where people in the porn are there unwillingly for various of reasons, so I'm not surprised if there are some who do feel guilt from looking at pornographic content where parties may be forced to be there, even if with majority of porn (at least hopefully) is done with at least consent.

Likelyhood of someone being pointed with gun and told to suck dick is higher than someone being pointed with gun and told to draw furry porn.

Mario69 said:
I have heard of situations where people in the porn are there unwillingly for various of reasons, so I'm not surprised if there are some who do feel guilt from looking at pornographic content where parties may be forced to be there, even if with majority of porn (at least hopefully) is done with at least consent.

Likelyhood of someone being pointed with gun and told to suck dick is higher than someone being pointed with gun and told to draw furry porn.

There's also instances of people being there willingly, but they either aren't told what a shoot is going to be, they're misled about what a shoot will be, the terms they agreed to are changed, and/or they aren't allowed to leave after they've reached their limit. You also get threats of blacklisting and other fun stuff.

regsmutt said:
There's also instances of people being there willingly, but they either aren't told what a shoot is going to be, they're misled about what a shoot will be, the terms they agreed to are changed, and/or they aren't allowed to leave after they've reached their limit. You also get threats of blacklisting and other fun stuff.

There's also the chance for one where the legal age is lower to have actors who are underage where the viewer is. With cartoons, who cares? They don't exist. With actual people, it's toward people who actually exist. It's real. In certain cases the viewer may have no idea, like if it's from a different country. In some cases, like lesser known ones or in certain networks, that's the whole selling point. There's also photographing nudists without their consent, and that period where nudism itself was targeted by people who wanted an excuse for child nudity.

And as said before, if it's a cartoon, the subject doesn't exist. They are in every sense made up. With the exception of personas, it just can't happen.

kamimatsu said:
And as said before, if it's a cartoon, the subject doesn't exist. They are in every sense made up. With the exception of personas, it just can't happen.

What if it's a drawing of a real person?

post #70269post #1043082

Are they exploitative because they contain real people or not because they're drawings?

_{I would've picked less inflammatory examples but these were the easiest to find.}

kamimatsu said:
There's also the chance for one where the legal age is lower to have actors who are underage where the viewer is. With cartoons, who cares? They don't exist. With actual people, it's toward people who actually exist. It's real. In certain cases the viewer may have no idea, like if it's from a different country. In some cases, like lesser known ones or in certain networks, that's the whole selling point. There's also photographing nudists without their consent, and that period where nudism itself was targeted by people who wanted an excuse for child nudity.

And as said before, if it's a cartoon, the subject doesn't exist. They are in every sense made up. With the exception of personas, it just can't happen.

To continue on the note of non-consensual photos- certain kinks are always going to be super iffy in real physical photos. Is this video of someone flashing people staged and consensual or is it real? Is the 'public shaming' caption to this photoset a story some rando made up, is it consensual roleplay, or is it revenge porn? What's acting and what's real in physical pain play? Sometimes you can tell, but there's a lot that's ambiguous.

i watch both, but then again gay porn isn't exploitative in any regard

hell, on rare occasions i'll watch straight porn, but only if it's group BECAUSE of the exploitative nature. some drugged up slut with issues getting used like they're not a human by a bunch of hot dudes?

post #1117174

hey, they ain't my lover, i couldn't care less. mazel tov

also, i don't feel guilt or regret because why do something you thought was shitty to begin with? and a "pornography addiction" sounds a bit nonsensical, don't you think?

Wow, thanks for all the responses! I’ve never used the forums before, so I expected maybe two responses...

In my experience with all the time I’ve spent using pornography - of any sort - when I actively need to be doing something else, and having trouble pulling myself away, even at great cost, leads me to view pornography addiction as a very real thing - certainly not as severe as, say, alcoholism, but I’d classify any behavior you use to help cope with stress and which you can’t always control as an addiction to some degree or another.

I roundly agree with the reasons for the industry being considered exploitive as presented by ikdind, though of course they don’t represent everybody in the field.

kamimatsu, I don’t really consider casual nudity as porn either, though of course some use it as such. Casual nudity is in fact one of my favorite tags. And I love art in general, and there’re many extremely legit works of art posted here, explicit or not. I’m just being honest with myself when I say that the main reason I’m on here and continue to return here is for the porn.

As for Lance Armstrong’s question, I consider consuming something an industry produces as inherently supporting that industry. People always have and always will find ways to steal an industry’s product, but even if they’re caused a small potential profit loss, the message they receive is 1. That their product is still wanted, and 2. Work harder on preventing theft. And so, if you’re sending a message to an industry that demand for their product exists, then you’re inherently encouraging them to create more of that product.

Note: I’m answering everything I feel I can answer in just one long message because, like I said, this is my first time on the forums, and I guess I’m too busy typing all this up to look up post limits.

And as far as supporting an exploitive industry as long as it’s men being exploited goes? I mean, a man is still just as much a person as a woman is, so that ain’t cool...

um

fuck ok i guess you've got me

i just don't want to hurt any real people, is all

is this a callout post or something

Ryuzaki_Tritium said:
um

fuck ok i guess you've got me

i just don't want to hurt any real people, is all

Ryuzaki_Tritium said:
is this a callout post or something

What?

Also, as to the topic at hand, drawn art is not nearly as exploitative as the real world pornography industry can be. Unless many artists are being held captive against their will in mass-porn-art-making factories, or something.

AminoMan said:
In my experience with all the time I’ve spent using pornography - of any sort - when I actively need to be doing something else, and having trouble pulling myself away, even at great cost, leads me to view pornography addiction as a very real thing

That sounded more to me like dependence than addiction to me, until I looked them up.

Yeah, that probably qualifies as an addiction. I'm a student now (ECE major) and I can definitely identify with "compulsively engaging in rewarding stimuli, despite adverse consequences." Not so much with porn as it is with surfing in general; I've developed a bit of an anxiety complex with working on essays, and that anxiety serves as a trigger to start doing "ungraded" work tagging images on e621, which helps me forget my deadlines. :P

And as far as supporting an exploitive industry as long as it’s men being exploited goes? I mean, a man is still just as much a person as a woman is, so that ain’t cool...

That's just Munkelzhan. Oddly, he has no negative records--I think he said somewhere that "If you have to break the rules to troll someone, you're not doing it right", but I can't find the quote...

I mostly just got into it because I wasn't into girls giving these obnoxious, totally fake moans like they're getting pleasured by a harem of angels

before they even take their pants off

MatrixMash said:
That's just Munkelzhan. Oddly, he has no negative records--I think he said somewhere that "If you have to break the rules to troll someone, you're not doing it right", but I can't find the quote...

Most of the time his comments are extremely obviously jokes, and thus don't actually end up riling people up.

Though I am still impressed by how many people take him seriously.

There's a rule I follow, that I think everyone should follow. If you think someone has said something that is completely ridiculous, assume that they're either joking or you've misunderstood before jumping to the "wow they're dumb" conclusion.

Honestly I feel like a failure to do this is at the root of a lot of common arguments, which I shall not list because their mere mention causes people to go bonkers. And we don't want that.

MatrixMash said:
"If you have to break the rules to troll someone, you're not doing it right"

100% true

Ryuzaki_Tritium said:
is this a callout post or something

I didn't mean to start this thread as a callout of any sort, though I see how it might seem like that, being as I called the porn industry "exploitive". And I should have elaborated that I only view the real life porn industry as such, not this site or drawn porn in general; thus my desire to avoid real life porn and my impetus to find drawn porn. I certainly don’t mean to throw shade on anyone here.

I don’t think drawn porn necessarily encourages objectification of others any more than, say, an Avon commercial, or any other product that encourages you to focus on appearance. Unless, of course, it in some way glorifies non-consensual sexual behavior – I think that, in any form of media, necessarily encourages objectification of others. And, of course, the degree of objectification depends on the individual; some may be able to use porn as much as they wish without increasing how much they objectify others.

I was just curious if anyone else views the reason they use this site the same way I view mine.

MatrixMash said:
That's just Munkelzhan. Oddly, he has no negative records--I think he said somewhere that "If you have to break the rules to troll someone, you're not doing it right", but I can't find the quote...

I like that quote. As for Munkelzhan's skillful trolling, I figured that’s what was going on, but since I’m not familiar with him, I figured I’d go ahead and bite.

I don't really have any guilt for enjoying porn. I really only watch premium porn like Brazzers, Reality Kings, Naughty America, etc. I figure at that level these pornstars who have like 50+ scenes under their belt are doing it of their own volition. I suppose if you're into really amateur porn then perhaps you could come across women who are being exploited, but luckily for me I've never much cared for amateur porn.

So no..."fantasy" porn like furry or R34 isn't because of guilt of any kind. I like it just cause I like it, not because I'm using it as an alternative.

I'm actually less concerned about exploitation in commercial porn, especially after watching Mercedes Carrera's interview with Gad Saad . Seems roughly comparable with regular acting (in which the psychological danger is of course non-zero -- consider Heath Ledger for example).

Exploitation in amateur porn seems like a much more real risk to me.

Anyway I can get the guilt argument, but it seems a bit skewed. There are all sorts of things you can be interpreted as implicitly supporting, a lot of which it's likely you have no clue exist. Feeling guilty about things that are much more directly connected to your moral agency -- for example, looking at porn instead of doing one of the things you know need to be done (organizing the house, writing a paper, talking to some boring administrator) -- seems more useful.

I'm suspicious of the validity of objectification as a concept, given its origin in the social sciences (which are seriously corrupt and AFAICS in the middle of disintegrating as a result). It would be a lot more trustworthy if it came out of neuroscience, say. Or if you could demonstrate that other sexually dimorphic animals do not do it (because if they do, chances are good you're fighting biology, and good luck with that)

(The basic problem here being, well, you can interpret things in that way; But is that interpretation more, or less,useful and accurate than others? For example you could instead postulate that we view people as objects by default, and it is only through active effort that this is overcome.
(There actually seems to be some neuroscientific evidence that under stress we become increasingly incapable of contextualizing things -- more and more literal. I'd say in that state, the sense in which people (including ourselves) exist is rather limited))

IMO the least problematic observation about porn is that it conditions a person to focus more on short term reward, which is generally bad.

My motivations are I guess mainly 'Drawn porn (and particularly furry, for whatever reason) is less trite and generic'

Dyrone said:
I don't really have any guilt for enjoying porn. I really only watch premium porn like Brazzers, Reality Kings, Naughty America, etc. I figure at that level these pornstars who have like 50+ scenes under their belt are doing it of their own volition. I suppose if you're into really amateur porn then perhaps you could come across women who are being exploited, but luckily for me I've never much cared for amateur porn.

A fair point, Dyrone

savageorange said:
I'm actually less concerned about exploitation in commercial porn, especially after watching Mercedes Carrera's interview with Gad Saad . Seems roughly comparable with regular acting (in which the psychological danger is of course non-zero -- consider Heath Ledger for example).

Exploitation in amateur porn seems like a much more real risk to me.

Anyway I can get the guilt argument, but it seems a bit skewed. There are all sorts of things you can be interpreted as implicitly supporting, a lot of which it's likely you have no clue exist. Feeling guilty about things that are much more directly connected to your moral agency -- for example, looking at porn instead of doing one of the things you know need to be done (organizing the house, writing a paper, talking to some boring administrator) -- seems more useful.

I'm suspicious of the validity of objectification as a concept, given its origin in the social sciences (which are seriously corrupt and AFAICS in the middle of disintegrating as a result). It would be a lot more trustworthy if it came out of neuroscience, say. Or if you could demonstrate that other sexually dimorphic animals do not do it (because if they do, chances are good you're fighting biology, and good luck with that)

(The basic problem here being, well, you can interpret things in that way; But is that interpretation more, or less,useful and accurate than others? For example you could instead postulate that we view people as objects by default, and it is only through active effort that this is overcome.
(There actually seems to be some neuroscientific evidence that under stress we become increasingly incapable of contextualizing things -- more and more literal. I'd say in that state, the sense in which people (including ourselves) exist is rather limited))

IMO the least problematic observation about porn is that it conditions a person to focus more on short term reward, which is generally bad.

My motivations are I guess mainly 'Drawn porn (and particularly furry, for whatever reason) is less trite and generic'

I think you've got some real insights here, savageorange. I like this. Thanks :)

Clawdragons said:
There really isn't any evidence that porn addiction is a thing.

To answer the question though - yes, I view "furry porn" in part to avoid the abuses of IRL pornography, though probably a different set of abuses than you worry about, given different content. That's only one motivator though. I also view it for a bunch of other reasons. I think it has its own merits.

I'm pretty sure it's a real thing because I've been trying to stop jacking off daily for an entire year now and it's incredibly hard to go more than two days. I'm not kidding at all, it has negative effects and no/little benefits too. I only figured out that I had a problem years ago when I first heard of porn addiction.

I prefer fictional porn because watching real porn brings an additional level of guilt. I feel bad not for objectifying them, which I do not, but for only caring to see them do one thing: something sexy that I can pleasure myself to. Real people make me conscious about how extremely self-centered I'm being.

As for casual nudity, as Kamimatsu brought up, I would argue that it's still porn. By and large it's made to be porn and that brings with it an inherently perverted take on the nudity. The best example I can muster would be with exaggerated expressions. These are done and done well precisely because they heighten the appeal of the work, something especially important in static imagery. However in real life a natural orgasm face will resemble something that could be seen when doing something unrelated or mundane (pain especially).

To get back to my point; even if the context presented in the art is non-sexual that doesn't stop the casual nudity from being portrayed in a very sexy way just as the piece could without the nudity. Ugly elements don't distract from this because they only make what's there unappealing.

In summary I disagree because of these three points: It's rare to see it done well or done properly, I think it's impossible for nudity to be both casual and non-sexual on a porn site (Context is important, people come here to find porn and the image is going to be filed alongside pornography.), and if nudity is a focus then it's going to be sexual to some degree.

fourroll said:
I'm pretty sure it's a real thing because I've been trying to stop jacking off daily for an entire year now and it's incredibly hard to go more than two days.

Find something else to get your dopamine from.

Beep said:
Because the people who view it feel guilty about viewing it thanks to a large number of prudish types out there that want to repress our normal sexual urges.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

fourroll said:
As for casual nudity, as Kamimatsu brought up, I would argue that it's still porn. By and large it's made to be porn and that brings with it an inherently perverted take on the nudity. The best example I can muster would be with exaggerated expressions. These are done and done well precisely because they heighten the appeal of the work, something especially important in static imagery. However in real life a natural orgasm face will resemble something that could be seen when doing something unrelated or mundane (pain especially).

To get back to my point; even if the context presented in the art is non-sexual that doesn't stop the casual nudity from being portrayed in a very sexy way just as the piece could without the nudity. Ugly elements don't distract from this because they only make what's there unappealing.

In summary I disagree because of these three points: It's rare to see it done well or done properly, I think it's impossible for nudity to be both casual and non-sexual on a porn site (Context is important, people come here to find porn and the image is going to be filed alongside pornography.), and if nudity is a focus then it's going to be sexual to some degree.

Everything is used sexually by someone, somewhere. Doesn't mean it's inherently sexual. And casual nudity is not "made to be porn". People have made porn under a disguise of casual nudity, but then they're lying. That's just exhibitionism.

Beep said:
Because the people who view it feel guilty about viewing it thanks to a large number of prudish types out there that want to repress our normal sexual urges.

Sounds like projection

Fenrick said:
Sounds like projection

Sounds like you got triggered

Lance_Armstrong said:
If you use a porn tube site that steals all the content, and then use an ad blocker on top of that, are you hurting the exploitive pornography industry?

You should get on this ASAP.

I actually do that. I feel proud now

Beep said:
Because the people who view it feel guilty about viewing it thanks to a large number of prudish types out there that want to repress our normal sexual urges.

This

MissChu said:
What?

Also, as to the topic at hand, drawn art is not nearly as exploitative as the real world pornography industry can be. Unless many artists are being held captive against their will in mass-porn-art-making factories, or something.

I'm actually being forced to draw furry porn at gunpoint by Isis as we speak. Why do they like asriel so much?