Great post, Sandra.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith  Sirkinm, you seem to be implying that it's not possible to make a viable porn movie which portrays women as real human beings. If that were true, then porn is simply something that's not of value to a conscious individual.
You don't need 45 minutes of back story. You just need the people on screen to interact with each other as though they're actual human beings with some sort of emotional connection rather than props. |
Keith, I still think you're missing the mark, and Sandra here illustrates how porn CAN have value, even if it doesn't portray an "emotional connection," "affectionate relationship," equal power between partners, or whatever else you're finding necessary for it to be of "value to a conscious individual."
Are you saying that sex must always coincide with an emotional bond? I think you're bringing your personal baggage and preconceptions about sex and portraying that as necessary for porn to be of value.
Your preferences are fine, but to condemn porn that doesn't adhere to them is short-sighted. Obviously if people are truly violated or dehumanized it is bad, but what the heck is wrong with, say, depicting sex in a way that is purely animalistic and not at all affectionate? Are you here to tell us that watching that, fantasizing about that, etc., indicates a "non-conscious" person.