Inovies Off Page Optimization



  • We are the Best SEO Services Company in India offering affordable SEO Services with guaranteed organic results. Our professional Search Engine Optimization services keep your website on the first page of Google. Inovies SEO, to know more visit our website.



  • @'miro':

    I think Japan is actually more restrictive than the West in a lot of ways particularly censorship, but it's also a typical example where it has the complete opposite effect to the governments intent, which is more porn consumption. Governments need to stop being nanny states.

    I'd agree with that if it wasn't for the fact that most people are idiots and need someone to tell them what to do. Yes, society as a whole suffers. But people need to grow the fuck up and take responsibility.


  • administrators

    @'Supro':

    Majority of the industries today were founded under dubious activities and porn is one of them (hell, wrestling is too and I love the shit out of that). I never said that all porn companies are criminals, but like other companies in other industries, a majority of them are working for themselves and not the consumer. So if they have to throw you under a bus, they will.

    I agree all industries have good and bad companies.

    @'Supro':

    As an adult, it's not morally corrupt to me. But for a child, it can be a bad thing. Even if you can provide the right context to them and it's just something vanilla like a boy and girl scene, you should not be letting them watch it or be near it. It can have a pernicious effect if they are not mature enough to understand what is happening. Kids aren't smart and need to be taught correctly to become smart.

    How is it a bad thing? Pernicious effect? That is that communal sentiment I'm talking about, but what I'm saying is, in my opinion there is no truth to this at all. A child should never be forced to watch porn in any shape or form and I don't think particularly encouraged either, however if the child and I'm talking under 18 goes into puberty they will look for it and find it. That is perfectly natural and there's nothing wrong with that. Normal porn will not harm a child in any way. People are brought up to believe it's harmful, but it's complete nonsense, unless you believe sex is shameful…. which also happens to be the act which brought you and I into being.

    Yes, you have extreme or even violent porn, but you also have violent and extreme regular movies and neither are fit to be watched by children, that's why we have age restrictions, which I agree with.

    The main thing is that we recognize that there's nothing wrong with porn in anyway shape or form and that it's treated equal to any other forms of art or entertainment.

    @'Supro':

    Secondly, laws and social acceptance are completely different in every country. I say bullcrap on the US having a repressed undercurrent when those who have done nude modeling or pornographic films have had success outside of the industry. Just because England has girls showing their tits in newspapers (which did have have complaints about it, but nothing substantial that would shut it down) doesn't mean the US doesn't have that. We just call them Playboy. :D

    I think Western societies like Australia, Europe, America have a long way to go, but considering the world stage they're undoubtedly the most liberal and democratic societies.

    @'Supro':

    Since you used the Puritans as the reason why the US is repressed, what's the reason for Japan?

    I think Japan is actually more restrictive than the West in a lot of ways particularly censorship, but it's also a typical example where it has the complete opposite effect to the governments intent, which is more porn consumption. Governments need to stop being nanny states.

    @'Nephanor':

    The funny thing is, the US has more of the conservative ones, because England scared all the extremists out, and they went off to form the US. Go figure. While I agree the page 3 girls aren't educational, the first time a kid sees them, and asks, it IS an opportunity TO make it educational. Unlike some US areas where parents are so scared they don't want their kids to even know how their body works in terms of sex.

    I agree page 3 girls are completely harmless… in fact they're quite useful in terms of lifting spirits and potentially other things :)

    @'Supro':

    I wouldn't say extreme conservative stance. The country doesn't actually have a strong tie to any religion outside of Shinto and Buddhism. They're just really fickle about how things are done. It's a strange country when you get deeper into it. But most people hit the surface of anime and otaku things and think it's the greatest country ever.

    Not stranger than any other country. The nuance is because of their difference in culture it's easy to see their "flaws", whilst we're oblivious to seeing our own… cause that's just how we were brought up!



  • @'Nephanor':

    @'Supro':

    I had a similar situation happen to me when I was young. Yeah, everyone looks at porn (except the Amish, though they have an excuse). But we don't want to look at you looking at porn.

    WHAT?! There is NO excuse not to look at porn! The Ahmish porn is just different. (Hey Gretta, show us your ankles!)

    Put that thing away! This isn't a Quaker State!

    I'm pretty sure a lawyer or law firm can't act on such a ruling without the copyright holder's approval. The article it links to does state these lawsuits have been initiated by adult entertainment companies.

    True, but also, if a law firm is hired to represent them, and they decide to go to that porn company and say "Hey, we think we can get you X million from illegal downloads if we peruse them" and don't mention HOW they will do it, I am sure the porn company wouldn't complain. Until after they found out. I haven't heard anything about that recently, so maybe they did because they realized it was bad for business. Never good to extort money from potential customers.

    Actually, porn companies have been doing this for a long time and have been cool with the idea. They were the ones to really jumpstart the anti-piracy movement, so I'm not surprised. I think at one point they even threatened to stop making porn, though I think that was just a rumor considering the fact that the cocaine is just too good. :D

    I know about The Sun (and their Page 3 girls). But I wouldn't go as far to say the magazine is good for a teaching opportunity since the magazine aims for the lowest common denominator. Just because it's more public doesn't mean it's better.

    The US has the same problem as other countries. You got a vocal minority who pushes their views over everyone else and gets their way.

    The funny thing is, the US has more of the conservative ones, because England scared all the extremists out, and they went off to form the US. Go figure. While I agree the page 3 girls aren't educational, the first time a kid sees them, and asks, it IS an opportunity TO make it educational. Unlike some US areas where parents are so scared they don't want their kids to even know how their body works in terms of sex.

    I wouldn't say that about US history. That's simplifying it. They made the (deadly) voyage over to the US to avoid the religious persecution in the homeland. The only ones who were extremists were the ones who waged war against England to gain their freedom. And that ended up working in their favor.

    Let's be honest, teaching their children about sex is not an easy task and most of the time they would rather have someone else do it or withhold it completely from them (which is a poor choice). South Park always made me laugh about the subject. The parents see their boy jerking the dog, who thinks it's a game of some kind. And when he didn't understand what he was doing, the parents blamed the school and had them teach the kids about sexual education, which led to a Mad Max-style battle. :D

    Okay, that won't happen in real life (yet), but the idea was that it's the parent's personal responsibility to teach their kids. And if they don't do it, then what the hell is their problem?

    Japan in of itself is a strange entity. While we look at it from the outside seeing a slew of porn coming out from there, they are honestly on the extremes of both sides. While they do have tentacle porn, this is the same country that has had censorship laws in effect since the turn of the century. Then again, this is also the same country that had lagged behind on Child Pornography laws.

    And also a lot of the tradition and honor stuff is more of a face for societies. People I know who lived there have said the culture is completely different than what media portrays. It's scary too.

    Yeah, not sure what to make of Japan, but remember, for most of their history, they were VERY isolated from the rest of the world. They only had contact with mainland China for a good amount of time, and then were hit with a flood of outside influence. And that was only in the past 150 years. With that influx of new ideas and cultures, I am sure, some went to an extreme conservative stance, not wanting to change, and some of that translated into policy. As to their views on children, they are a place where lolita style porn is very popular, and a lot of their stuff has to do with older men and younger women, so they have their own strange ways. I guess if you don't live there, you don't really understand them.

    I wouldn't say extreme conservative stance. The country doesn't actually have a strong tie to any religion outside of Shinto and Buddhism. They're just really fickle about how things are done. It's a strange country when you get deeper into it. But most people hit the surface of anime and otaku things and think it's the greatest country ever.

    BTW Otakus. They hate those too.



  • @'Supro':

    I had a similar situation happen to me when I was young. Yeah, everyone looks at porn (except the Amish, though they have an excuse). But we don't want to look at you looking at porn.

    WHAT?! There is NO excuse not to look at porn! The Ahmish porn is just different. (Hey Gretta, show us your ankles!)

    I'm pretty sure a lawyer or law firm can't act on such a ruling without the copyright holder's approval. The article it links to does state these lawsuits have been initiated by adult entertainment companies.

    True, but also, if a law firm is hired to represent them, and they decide to go to that porn company and say "Hey, we think we can get you X million from illegal downloads if we peruse them" and don't mention HOW they will do it, I am sure the porn company wouldn't complain. Until after they found out. I haven't heard anything about that recently, so maybe they did because they realized it was bad for business. Never good to extort money from potential customers.

    I know about The Sun (and their Page 3 girls). But I wouldn't go as far to say the magazine is good for a teaching opportunity since the magazine aims for the lowest common denominator. Just because it's more public doesn't mean it's better.

    The US has the same problem as other countries. You got a vocal minority who pushes their views over everyone else and gets their way.

    The funny thing is, the US has more of the conservative ones, because England scared all the extremists out, and they went off to form the US. Go figure. While I agree the page 3 girls aren't educational, the first time a kid sees them, and asks, it IS an opportunity TO make it educational. Unlike some US areas where parents are so scared they don't want their kids to even know how their body works in terms of sex.

    Japan in of itself is a strange entity. While we look at it from the outside seeing a slew of porn coming out from there, they are honestly on the extremes of both sides. While they do have tentacle porn, this is the same country that has had censorship laws in effect since the turn of the century. Then again, this is also the same country that had lagged behind on Child Pornography laws.

    And also a lot of the tradition and honor stuff is more of a face for societies. People I know who lived there have said the culture is completely different than what media portrays. It's scary too.

    Yeah, not sure what to make of Japan, but remember, for most of their history, they were VERY isolated from the rest of the world. They only had contact with mainland China for a good amount of time, and then were hit with a flood of outside influence. And that was only in the past 150 years. With that influx of new ideas and cultures, I am sure, some went to an extreme conservative stance, not wanting to change, and some of that translated into policy. As to their views on children, they are a place where lolita style porn is very popular, and a lot of their stuff has to do with older men and younger women, so they have their own strange ways. I guess if you don't live there, you don't really understand them.



  • @'Nephanor':

    @'Supro':

    Wait, why would you do go into a public store or library and look at porn? They could kick you out for doing such a thing since the rules in place don't allow for their computers to be used in such a way. If you buy one yourself, you can freely use it however you want. I have no arguments about that. But why do you need people to see you looking at your private activity? That's more or less invasion of their privacy.

    I haven't, and never would, but there have been instances of it. Heck, I remember seeing a picture of an Apple store with a guy doing just that. We all laughed about it but you have to think that obviously this guy either had no computer to do it at home, or someone at his home was making it so uncomfortable for him to do it there, a public place was more comfortable to him. That says a lot in itself.

    I had a similar situation happen to me when I was young. Yeah, everyone looks at porn (except the Amish, though they have an excuse). But we don't want to look at you looking at porn.

    Here's the article. http://consumerist.com/2012/06/comcast-not-cooperating-with-porn-lawyers-looking-to-shake-down-bittorrent-users.html

    RIAA and MPAA are pretty bad. But what they attempted to do was a form of blackmail.

    The question on this, and the article never really states, is are these law groups actually doing what the porn companies want, or just going out for money like a group of greedy lawyers? The first, I find hard to believe, the second I would believe in a heartbeat.

    I'm pretty sure a lawyer or law firm can't act on such a ruling without the copyright holder's approval. The article it links to does state these lawsuits have been initiated by adult entertainment companies.

    Secondly, laws and social acceptance are completely different in every country. I say bullcrap on the US having a repressed undercurrent when those who have done nude modeling or pornographic films have had success outside of the industry. Just because England has girls showing their tits in newspapers (which did have have complaints about it, but nothing substantial that would shut it down) doesn't mean the US doesn't have that. We just call them Playboy. :D

    I would like to point out that I am a Canadian, and I did live 10 years in the US, so I see things from a different view. There is a repressed undercurrent, especially in the political forum and goodness knows I heard the rantings of groups like the centre for family values or whatever it was called, and all those very vocal people who wanted to quash anything that even had a hint of being dirty. And yes, the US has playboy, but unlike the newspaper in England (referring to The Sun) a kid can't buy a Playboy. They don't 'cover their kids eyes' from naughty images, they actually use it as a teaching opportunity.

    I know about The Sun (and their Page 3 girls). But I wouldn't go as far to say the magazine is good for a teaching opportunity since the magazine aims for the lowest common denominator. Just because it's more public doesn't mean it's better.

    The US has the same problem as other countries. You got a vocal minority who pushes their views over everyone else and gets their way.

    Since you used the Puritans as the reason why the US is repressed, what's the reason for Japan?

    Part of me wants to fall out of my chair laughing, the other actually has a theory. I will explain both, since I am a fan of Japanese culture.

    The laughing: Japan, the country that brings us manga and hentai, repressed? Really? This is the country that INVENTED tentacle porn for gods sake! And not just recently, they have tentacle porn images dating back hundreds of years. Kids can buy art books that are probably more lewd than even Hustler

    The theory: While the Japanese are very open about their non-photographic art, they are repressed on their photographic and video art. This probably comes from their culture, which is very rooted in tradition and honour. They do a good job of separating fantasy (with hentai) and reality. Also, over there animated shows like anime are as common as sitcoms are here. So while they may have a more repressed porn of real women, their hentai fills in that gap, and they keep them separated as a way to keep the fantasy and reality separated. This is just a theory, as I have never been over there to talk to any Japanese people, but it makes sense from what I know.

    And yes, I have seen enough hentai to know where this is going. :D

    Japan in of itself is a strange entity. While we look at it from the outside seeing a slew of porn coming out from there, they are honestly on the extremes of both sides. While they do have tentacle porn, this is the same country that has had censorship laws in effect since the turn of the century. Then again, this is also the same country that had lagged behind on Child Pornography laws.

    And also a lot of the tradition and honor stuff is more of a face for societies. People I know who lived there have said the culture is completely different than what media portrays. It's scary too.



  • @'Supro':

    Wait, why would you do go into a public store or library and look at porn? They could kick you out for doing such a thing since the rules in place don't allow for their computers to be used in such a way. If you buy one yourself, you can freely use it however you want. I have no arguments about that. But why do you need people to see you looking at your private activity? That's more or less invasion of their privacy.

    I haven't, and never would, but there have been instances of it. Heck, I remember seeing a picture of an Apple store with a guy doing just that. We all laughed about it but you have to think that obviously this guy either had no computer to do it at home, or someone at his home was making it so uncomfortable for him to do it there, a public place was more comfortable to him. That says a lot in itself.

    When I mean public entity, I mean the site is designed for everyone of all ages. That's the term I was looking for. It doesn't need to get the porn-loving demographic by allowing such content on there. As stated, you already have thousands of porn sites to look at. Do you need YT to really have any? It doesn't need it. The site is successful on its own.

    Now THAT is a better way to put it. In truth, I agree, YT does not need porn, I just wanted to look at the whole thing from a different perspective. Second nature to me. That, and I kind of want to see a place where people can surf to get what they want, porn or not, without having to sign up for a thousand different sites.

    Here's the article. http://consumerist.com/2012/06/comcast-not-cooperating-with-porn-lawyers-looking-to-shake-down-bittorrent-users.html

    RIAA and MPAA are pretty bad. But what they attempted to do was a form of blackmail.

    The question on this, and the article never really states, is are these law groups actually doing what the porn companies want, or just going out for money like a group of greedy lawyers? The first, I find hard to believe, the second I would believe in a heartbeat.

    First off, why would you use that example at the end? It has nothing to do with the topic at hand since we agreed that porn is acceptable in your own private setting. I don't get how you get the argument "no porn makes you rape women" from any of this. :huh:

    Sorry, used to defending porn against people who want to ban it, and that's something that I tend to use as habit. Didn't really have any relevance now that I think about it.

    Secondly, laws and social acceptance are completely different in every country. I say bullcrap on the US having a repressed undercurrent when those who have done nude modeling or pornographic films have had success outside of the industry. Just because England has girls showing their tits in newspapers (which did have have complaints about it, but nothing substantial that would shut it down) doesn't mean the US doesn't have that. We just call them Playboy. :D

    I would like to point out that I am a Canadian, and I did live 10 years in the US, so I see things from a different view. There is a repressed undercurrent, especially in the political forum and goodness knows I heard the rantings of groups like the centre for family values or whatever it was called, and all those very vocal people who wanted to quash anything that even had a hint of being dirty. And yes, the US has playboy, but unlike the newspaper in England (referring to The Sun) a kid can't buy a Playboy. They don't 'cover their kids eyes' from naughty images, they actually use it as a teaching opportunity.

    Since you used the Puritans as the reason why the US is repressed, what's the reason for Japan?

    Part of me wants to fall out of my chair laughing, the other actually has a theory. I will explain both, since I am a fan of Japanese culture.

    The laughing: Japan, the country that brings us manga and hentai, repressed? Really? This is the country that INVENTED tentacle porn for gods sake! And not just recently, they have tentacle porn images dating back hundreds of years. Kids can buy art books that are probably more lewd than even Hustler

    The theory: While the Japanese are very open about their non-photographic art, they are repressed on their photographic and video art. This probably comes from their culture, which is very rooted in tradition and honour. They do a good job of separating fantasy (with hentai) and reality. Also, over there animated shows like anime are as common as sitcoms are here. So while they may have a more repressed porn of real women, their hentai fills in that gap, and they keep them separated as a way to keep the fantasy and reality separated. This is just a theory, as I have never been over there to talk to any Japanese people, but it makes sense from what I know.

    And yes, I have seen enough hentai to know where this is going. :D



  • All porn companies are criminals?

    Majority of the industries today were founded under dubious activities and porn is one of them (hell, wrestling is too and I love the shit out of that). I never said that all porn companies are criminals, but like other companies in other industries, a majority of them are working for themselves and not the consumer. So if they have to throw you under a bus, they will.

    Sure I think porn is lewd Smile But let me put it another way. Let's take you average boy and girl porn, no extreme stuff for a minute. Do you think porn is bad? And I don't mean eating too much chocolate will make you fat bad, I mean morally corrupt? And if so why?

    As an adult, it's not morally corrupt to me. But for a child, it can be a bad thing. Even if you can provide the right context to them and it's just something vanilla like a boy and girl scene, you should not be letting them watch it or be near it. It can have a pernicious effect if they are not mature enough to understand what is happening. Kids aren't smart and need to be taught correctly to become smart.

    @'Supro':

    Then leave it private. Why does a public entity like Youtube need to have porn on their site? They don't.

    How do you define if a website is a public entity? If you define it by how you can view it, even porn websites can be defined as public. I can view a porn website at work if I want, or walk into an Apple store and load one up on a machine there, or in a public library. The internet itself is inherently public. The only thing that determines privacy is do you have to log in. And YouTube HAS a login system, so they theoretically COULD go into porn, and just segregate it to those who want to see it, without affecting anyone else.

    Wait, why would you do go into a public store or library and look at porn? They could kick you out for doing such a thing since the rules in place don't allow for their computers to be used in such a way. If you buy one yourself, you can freely use it however you want. I have no arguments about that. But why do you need people to see you looking at your private activity? That's more or less invasion of their privacy.

    When I mean public entity, I mean the site is designed for everyone of all ages. That's the term I was looking for. It doesn't need to get the porn-loving demographic by allowing such content on there. As stated, you already have thousands of porn sites to look at. Do you need YT to really have any? It doesn't need it. The site is successful on its own.

    Yeah, they are. They're the same companies that wanted your downloaded files to be public, on top of charging you for illegally downloading it. When an evil company like Comcast says they don't want to do that, then you have to realize how bad you are.

    I am curious to know what you are referring to on this, because this activity sounds more like RIAA or the MPA than a porn industry. And we all know THOSE guys are about as evil as they come.

    Here's the article. http://consumerist.com/2012/06/comcast-not-cooperating-with-porn-lawyers-looking-to-shake-down-bittorrent-users.html

    RIAA and MPAA are pretty bad. But what they attempted to do was a form of blackmail.

    As to porn being obscene, that is actually not really a good way of putting it, as obscenity is actually determined by society. And I hate to say it, but the US, which is where a vast majority of content on the internet seems to come from, is NOT very socially liberal on this. Why is that? The US was founded by the New World Puritans, who believed that pleasure was evil, that they could punish those against their religion, and such. This led the US to having a very repressed undercurrent when it comes to sexuality the human body. For goodness sakes, in England, you can open the newspaper and see a topless woman, and no one throws a fit. If that happened in the US, shit would hit the fan. Even between the US and Canada, you can see the subtle differences. Just watch some of the commercials from Canada vs. the US. You will see that even Canada has a more open attitude (It's the French influence, they like them some hedonism!)

    Now is porn lewd? Absolutely. But as mire said, it's not morally wrong or hurting anyone to look at it. The production of it is a different matter, and what individual companies or groups do, they need to be judged on in a case by case basis, but just looking at it is not wrong in any way shape or form. It is a natural extension of curiosity, and can be a nice relief valve for some. After all, would you rather have a guy sitting in his house, jerking off to porn, or going out and raping women because he can't get access to any porn?

    First off, why would you use that example at the end? It has nothing to do with the topic at hand since we agreed that porn is acceptable in your own private setting. I don't get how you get the argument "no porn makes you rape women" from any of this. :huh:

    Secondly, laws and social acceptance are completely different in every country. I say bullcrap on the US having a repressed undercurrent when those who have done nude modeling or pornographic films have had success outside of the industry. Just because England has girls showing their tits in newspapers (which did have have complaints about it, but nothing substantial that would shut it down) doesn't mean the US doesn't have that. We just call them Playboy. :D

    Since you used the Puritans as the reason why the US is repressed, what's the reason for Japan?



  • I am going to play Devil's Advocate and throw a couple thoughts into your discussion here. Not meaning to take any one side or another, just add a little thought to it.

    @'Supro':

    Then leave it private. Why does a public entity like Youtube need to have porn on their site? They don't.

    How do you define if a website is a public entity? If you define it by how you can view it, even porn websites can be defined as public. I can view a porn website at work if I want, or walk into an Apple store and load one up on a machine there, or in a public library. The internet itself is inherently public. The only thing that determines privacy is do you have to log in. And YouTube HAS a login system, so they theoretically COULD go into porn, and just segregate it to those who want to see it, without affecting anyone else.

    Yeah, they are. They're the same companies that wanted your downloaded files to be public, on top of charging you for illegally downloading it. When an evil company like Comcast says they don't want to do that, then you have to realize how bad you are.

    I am curious to know what you are referring to on this, because this activity sounds more like RIAA or the MPA than a porn industry. And we all know THOSE guys are about as evil as they come.

    As to porn being obscene, that is actually not really a good way of putting it, as obscenity is actually determined by society. And I hate to say it, but the US, which is where a vast majority of content on the internet seems to come from, is NOT very socially liberal on this. Why is that? The US was founded by the New World Puritans, who believed that pleasure was evil, that they could punish those against their religion, and such. This led the US to having a very repressed undercurrent when it comes to sexuality the human body. For goodness sakes, in England, you can open the newspaper and see a topless woman, and no one throws a fit. If that happened in the US, shit would hit the fan. Even between the US and Canada, you can see the subtle differences. Just watch some of the commercials from Canada vs. the US. You will see that even Canada has a more open attitude (It's the French influence, they like them some hedonism!)

    Now is porn lewd? Absolutely. But as mire said, it's not morally wrong or hurting anyone to look at it. The production of it is a different matter, and what individual companies or groups do, they need to be judged on in a case by case basis, but just looking at it is not wrong in any way shape or form. It is a natural extension of curiosity, and can be a nice relief valve for some. After all, would you rather have a guy sitting in his house, jerking off to porn, or going out and raping women because he can't get access to any porn?


  • administrators

    @'Supro':

    Then leave it private. Why does a public entity like Youtube need to have porn on their site? They don't.

    If they had a monopoly on user driven online video I would disagree and say they should, but since there are plenty of reasonable alternatives I agree with you they don't.

    @'Supro':

    Yeah, they are. They're the same companies that wanted your downloaded files to be public, on top of charging you for illegally downloading it. When an evil company like Comcast says they don't want to do that, then you have to realize how bad you are.

    All porn companies are criminals?

    @'Supro':

    Then look for it yourself. You don't need a site like Youtube to have porn. Let's be honest: Porn is obscene. I love it. These people on the forum love it. Yet we know that it's obscene. I think you're just in denial about it and thinking it's not.

    Sure I think porn is lewd :) But let me put it another way. Let's take you average boy and girl porn, no extreme stuff for a minute. Do you think porn is bad? And I don't mean eating too much chocolate will make you fat bad, I mean morally corrupt? And if so why?



  • @'miro':

    @'Supro':

    I think your opinion about porn is different from what others feel. People do feel that sex is a private matter and shouldn't be openly exposed as you would think. While you think "well, that's what Christians believe", it's actually what a lot of people do believe in, religious or not. People don't feel so passionate about porn as you do, but just because you don't think it is okay doesn't mean you're right about it.

    I also think porn is private. I always say it's the best private entertainment… there are arguably better things to do with a group of people :)
    I never said "Christians believe" I agree there are lots of non-Christian purists, who think porn is bad. But what I'm saying is those "purists" regardless of whether they are offended by porn (nobody forces them to like it) should not be allowed to ban porn because of it. Same goes for government. Why? because porn is not harmful. That is the only point I'm trying to make.

    Then leave it private. Why does a public entity like Youtube need to have porn on their site? They don't.

    I saw that article you posted about these sharks, but I don't think all porn companies are sharks like that. These are just plain criminals that exist in any other industry. The only reason why there may be more criminal activity around the porn industry is because it's semi illegal. The same reason why prohibition caused more crime than good and was abolished.

    Yeah, they are. They're the same companies that wanted your downloaded files to be public, on top of charging you for illegally downloading it. When an evil company like Comcast says they don't want to do that, then you have to realize how bad you are.

    I don't see it everywhere. Like people have said the fact that it's considered obscene and frowned upon by society works quite well and restricts it to dedicated sites. If you want to see porn you have to look for it. It's not hard to find mind you :D

    Then look for it yourself. You don't need a site like Youtube to have porn. Let's be honest: Porn is obscene. I love it. These people on the forum love it. Yet we know that it's obscene. I think you're just in denial about it and thinking it's not.


  • administrators

    @'fredfred5150':

    Do you think having an outlet for pornography almost everywhere you look online is a way of trying to force people to like it, by having it constantly shoved in their face?

    I don't see it everywhere. Like people have said the fact that it's considered obscene and frowned upon by society works quite well and restricts it to dedicated sites. If you want to see porn you have to look for it. It's not hard to find mind you :D



  • @'miro':

    But what I'm saying is those "purists" regardless of whether they are offended by porn (nobody forces them to like it) should not be allowed to ban porn because of it.

    Do you think having an outlet for pornography almost everywhere you look online is a way of trying to force people to like it, by having it constantly shoved in their face?

    I read like a total prude on this thread, nothing could be further from the truth, just being an "intellectual provocatuer"


  • administrators

    @'Alpensepp':

    I think the "causing harm as only justification for moral" is a bit weak. Human society and moral is just more complex than that. Assume your girlfriend cheats on you. Does she cause you any harm? No. Do you accept that? Probably not.

    I said causing harm should be the rule, I did not say it was going to be an easy line to draw :) Of course it's quite difficult to determine harm. Physical harm is fairly straight forward, but there's also mental harm, that's the tough one to judge.

    But anything other than harm is just one guys opinion vs another. I may be offended by your pink shirt that does not give me the right to ban pink shirts even if it's 99 people vs 1. But that's just how I see it. Do you maybe have an example where something is offensive that does not cause harm, but should be illegal?

    @'Alpensepp':

    Of course certain rules are just arbitrary bullshit, but the line is not that easy to draw. Otherwise people could not argue about such stuff since millennia xD

    I disagree, people have been wrong about lots of things for millennia. Slavery, women's oppression, apostasy, racism to name but a few morally corrupt acts, most of which have only been officially outlawed within the last couple of centuries.

    @'Alpensepp':

    The bank is not part of your purchase contract, is it? I have no clue if it's the same for service providers like PayPal, as they serve technically as a man in the middle… It's just hard to believe "it's filthy" really is the only reason, but that's just me...

    Obsenity is the underlying reason, there are lots of other including financial as you pointed out that derive from that.

    @'Supro':

    I think your opinion about porn is different from what others feel. People do feel that sex is a private matter and shouldn't be openly exposed as you would think. While you think "well, that's what Christians believe", it's actually what a lot of people do believe in, religious or not. People don't feel so passionate about porn as you do, but just because you don't think it is okay doesn't mean you're right about it.

    I also think porn is private. I always say it's the best private entertainment… there are arguably better things to do with a group of people :)
    I never said "Christians believe" I agree there are lots of non-Christian purists, who think porn is bad. But what I'm saying is those "purists" regardless of whether they are offended by porn (nobody forces them to like it) should not be allowed to ban porn because of it. Same goes for government. Why? because porn is not harmful. That is the only point I'm trying to make.

    @'Supro':

    The porn industry is a whole different business. They are sharks in the water and once they find any sort of violation, they'll be sending lawyers after lawyers to get as much money as they can. You ever wonder why cheggit doesn't exist anymore? Users were posting the content and they were the ones having to pay due to DMCA violations. Soon enough, it became too much and they had to quit. I don't YT wants to deal with them because personally, that's too much money that they won't get back.

    I saw that article you posted about these sharks, but I don't think all porn companies are sharks like that. These are just plain criminals that exist in any other industry. The only reason why there may be more criminal activity around the porn industry is because it's semi illegal. The same reason why prohibition caused more crime than good and was abolished.



  • @'Alpensepp':

    Mhm… Sure? I mean e.g. SSL was first published in 1994 by Netscape, that's prior to the "internet revolution", no? No one doubts that the porn industry is the/a reason why certain standards, technologies etc. established themselves and others vanished, but porn as reason for the development? I think that's a bit too much...

    SSL may have been built then, but was it widely used back then? Not really. There is actually a movie about how the porn industry really jump started the e-commerce model. It is called "Middle Men" and it is quite an interesting watch. I found this little blurb on it here:

    Online Credit Card Payments

    I remember learning about online credit card transactions through a porn website back in late '94 when I was still in college, and at the time, I was terrified of the possibility of someone else getting my info. Now it is a standard model, and I am actually more likely to buy online.



  • @'miro':

    @'Alpensepp':

    But Google does not actively provide any porn, while Youtube would. I think the advertisement argument is valid.

    I'm not saying it would ever work as it currently stands, Google is just a perfect example of both co-existing to an extent ( as far as I understand they don't actually allow porn advertisers :) ) If youtube were to allow porn it would be users supplying not youtube although yes most would probably not work out the distinction, surprised they can with Google actually :) But it's certainly much harder to change course mid way.

    The money issue is more or less besides the point. The point is porn is described by law as obscene! That is the legal argument. In other words government and society label porn as "bad", when in fact it's the opposite of bad. But because even government acknowledges the fact that porn is bad, well it makes it easy for companies to jump on the bandwagon. Financial reasons may be the current reasoning, but obscenity certainly is the artificial justification.

    The problem is people get offended for all sorts of reason, that does NOT give you the right to discriminate. There should be only one argument and that is causing harm, everything else is just trying to force your opinion on others.

    I think your opinion about porn is different from what others feel. People do feel that sex is a private matter and shouldn't be openly exposed as you would think. While you think "well, that's what Christians believe", it's actually what a lot of people do believe in, religious or not. People don't feel so passionate about porn as you do, but just because you don't think it is okay doesn't mean you're right about it.

    And even if users were the ones posting porn on youtube, Youtube would still get the blame for it and they would have to pay for your actions. One of the problems YT has is that users post copyrighted videos or music on their site. YT has to foot the bill for every violation, which is the reason why most videos get removed. They were able to work out deals with some of these companies, but it comes at a heavy price.

    The porn industry is a whole different business. They are sharks in the water and once they find any sort of violation, they'll be sending lawyers after lawyers to get as much money as they can. You ever wonder why cheggit doesn't exist anymore? Users were posting the content and they were the ones having to pay due to DMCA violations. Soon enough, it became too much and they had to quit. I don't YT wants to deal with them because personally, that's too much money that they won't get back.



  • @'miro':

    I'm not saying it would ever work as it currently stands, Google is just a perfect example of both co-existing to an extent ( as far as I understand they don't actually allow porn advertisers :) ) If youtube were to allow porn it would be users supplying not youtube although yes most would probably not work out the distinction, surprised they can with Google actually :) But it's certainly much harder to change course mid way.

    I still think the situation is vastly different: Yes users upload the content, but YouTube hosts it and you'd access the porn stuff by visiting their sites. This is not the case for Google (Well… one could argue that Google provides caching, so you can actually get a page with pornographic content from a Google server...)

    @'miro':

    The money issue is more or less besides the point. The point is porn is described by law as obscene! That is the legal argument. In other words government and society label porn as "bad", when in fact it's the opposite of bad. But because even government acknowledges the fact that porn is bad, well it makes it easy for companies to jump on the bandwagon. Financial reasons may be the current reasoning, but obscenity certainly is the artificial justification.

    The problem is people get offended for all sorts of reason, that does NOT give you the right to discriminate. There should be only one argument and that is causing harm, everything else is just trying to force your opinion on others.

    Of course if no one was offended by porn, the argument would be void. But as long as advertisers do mind, not providing porn, because you lose money otherwise, is a valid business decision.

    I think the "causing harm as only justification for moral" is a bit weak. Human society and moral is just more complex than that. Assume your girlfriend cheats on you. Does she cause you any harm? No. Do you accept that? Probably not.
    Of course certain rules are just arbitrary bullshit, but the line is not that easy to draw. Otherwise people could not argue about such stuff since millennia xD

    @'miro':

    where can I find info on this, would be an interesting read

    Can't remember. E-hentai forums?… don't think there ever was an official statement, but that's the rumor. I don't see any other reason why all this stuff suddenly disappeared and ex-hentai came to life.

    @'miro':

    legal issues? I don't think that's the case for a payment provider, they could just disallow for certain countries then as they do with other things, otherwise the banks wouldn't allow porn transactions and I think they would be the first to run if money was to be lost :D

    The bank is not part of your purchase contract, is it? I have no clue if it's the same for service providers like PayPal, as they serve technically as a man in the middle… It's just hard to believe "it's filthy" really is the only reason, but that's just me...

    @'Nephanor':

    The funny thing is that most of the security features on the web actually came from porn. Long ago, there was no SSL and https, but then the porn industry decided they wanted to take money online for their services, and it was developed. People would be surprised at all that was brought into existence by the encouragement of porn industry. Steaming video, webcams, the whole notion of e-commerce, subtitles, closed captioning, high bandwidth, microfiche, digital cameras…and yet, it is still considered a black sheep. People need to wake up.

    Mhm… Sure? I mean e.g. SSL was first published in 1994 by Netscape, that's prior to the "internet revolution", no? No one doubts that the porn industry is the/a reason why certain standards, technologies etc. established themselves and others vanished, but porn as reason for the development? I think that's a bit too much...



  • The funny thing is that most of the security features on the web actually came from porn. Long ago, there was no SSL and https, but then the porn industry decided they wanted to take money online for their services, and it was developed. People would be surprised at all that was brought into existence by the encouragement of porn industry. Steaming video, webcams, the whole notion of e-commerce, subtitles, closed captioning, high bandwidth, microfiche, digital cameras…and yet, it is still considered a black sheep. People need to wake up.


  • administrators

    @'Alpensepp':

    But Google does not actively provide any porn, while Youtube would. I think the advertisement argument is valid.

    I'm not saying it would ever work as it currently stands, Google is just a perfect example of both co-existing to an extent ( as far as I understand they don't actually allow porn advertisers :) ) If youtube were to allow porn it would be users supplying not youtube although yes most would probably not work out the distinction, surprised they can with Google actually :) But it's certainly much harder to change course mid way.

    The money issue is more or less besides the point. The point is porn is described by law as obscene! That is the legal argument. In other words government and society label porn as "bad", when in fact it's the opposite of bad. But because even government acknowledges the fact that porn is bad, well it makes it easy for companies to jump on the bandwagon. Financial reasons may be the current reasoning, but obscenity certainly is the artificial justification.

    The problem is people get offended for all sorts of reason, that does NOT give you the right to discriminate. There should be only one argument and that is causing harm, everything else is just trying to force your opinion on others.

    @'Alpensepp':

    e-hentai removed extrem fetishes (like loli and shota) from the main site, because it offended advertisers… and the companies placing advertisement on e-hentai are usually other porn sites...

    where can I find info on this, would be an interesting read

    @'Alpensepp':

    I'd appreciate it, if I could buy porn stuff via Paypal… but is "porn is dirty" really the only reason? Usually such moral standards are the first thing people throw overboard, if the can make some money xD Since (certain) porn is illegal in various countries I assumed that they might run into legal issues serving as a mediator, for an illegal transaction... or something like that.
    I could understand if they don't want to bother with that, but just because they don't like it, is pretty lame :P

    legal issues? I don't think that's the case for a payment provider, they could just disallow for certain countries then as they do with other things, otherwise the banks wouldn't allow porn transactions and I think they would be the first to run if money was to be lost :D

    And I do still think the fact that society labels porn as obscene is what gave Payapl the justification. But I'm going on the fact that porn is NOT filth, does anybody think porn IS filth?



  • Well, having been on the receiving end of a paypal screwjob about 6 years ago; I'd say that there's no way they will 'sell' porn anymore. When I first started, I did many commissions via paypal when they were a baby site and on very shaky financial ground. Of course, once they became 'the' online pay venue; they literally went around and gutted all of the porn out of their active lists.

    To use a metaphor; there's a small town and a pretty girl who needs money. So she goes around, doing anything for anyone (oral, anal, animal, etc.) until she becomes successful and has enough money to move to another town. Once there, she becomes high and mighty and keeps all of her porn past in the closet, and won't speak of it again.

    This has happened repeatedly in he past with erotica and mainstream financial companies. They start online in a tiny way and will take any and all erotica to push cash into their coffers; once they can stand on their own, bye-bye porn!

    As for the 'children' argument; speaking as a bachelor and only for myself. Most kids are fucking dumb as hell and if their parent's can't control them; they'll get porn anyway when they're not abusing old ladies on buses like litle animals.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to NodeBB was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.