Is pornography good or bad for society? - And why?

Is pornography good or bad for society?

  • All forms of Pornography are good for society, even pedo, beastality, necrophillia etc

    Votes: 4 2.6%
  • Most porn is good for society, except for really wack shit pedo, beastality, necrophilia etc

    Votes: 25 16.4%
  • Only some porn is good for society, and stuff like furry, ageplay, edgeplay and BDSM etc is not

    Votes: 3 2.0%
  • Porn is neither good nor bad for society overall

    Votes: 61 40.1%
  • Most porn is bad for society, and only the tamest kinds (softcore) should be ok

    Votes: 35 23.0%
  • All porn is evil and should be banned

    Votes: 24 15.8%

  • Total voters
    152

Lemmingwise

Welcome home
kiwifarms.net
James Joyce had a fart fetish and was into buttfucking his wife. E.H Lawrence wrote self-insert porn of himself being gang-raped by swarthy Arabs, and it was published as part of a bestselling novel (Lawrence of Arabia). He also wrote one of the most scandalous novels of all time (Lady Chatterly's Lover). Mozart was sexually attracted to his cousin, and they exchanged obscene letters to each other. Mozart also wrote an ode to analingus. One of the degenerate popes was known for throwing a party where he had whores crawl naked on the ground for scattered chestnuts while guests masturbated on them. Nero would dress in a lion-skin and "savage the genitals" of women in his court- often in public.
Pretending that sexual perversion somehow appeared out of thin air in the last 50 years and that people before then all just had sex with the lights off just like the Film-Authority approved movies showed is shockingly ignorant.
It's nice to know that average internet autists have surpassed Roman emperors, Popes and top of the foodchain artists of yore in levels of depravity.

I wonder what the people on top of the foodchain are into today, but I suspect I don't really want to know.

I have some suspicions, though.

 

Senior Lexmechanic

Shitposting displeases the Omnissiah
kiwifarms.net
It's nice to know that average internet autists have surpassed Roman emperors, Popes and top of the foodchain artists of yore in levels of depravity.
And, of course, you draw the wrong conclusions. "Greatness" and sexual perversity aren't linked; it's just that we know more about great people's sex lives because no historian is going to write about the village idiot who tries to bite women on the bum.
 

BlastDoors41

kiwifarms.net
James Joyce had a fart fetish and was into buttfucking his wife. E.H Lawrence wrote self-insert porn of himself being gang-raped by swarthy Arabs, and it was published as part of a bestselling novel (Lawrence of Arabia). He also wrote one of the most scandalous novels of all time (Lady Chatterly's Lover). Mozart was sexually attracted to his cousin, and they exchanged obscene letters to each other. Mozart also wrote an ode to analingus. One of the degenerate popes was known for throwing a party where he had whores crawl naked on the ground for scattered chestnuts while guests masturbated on them. Nero would dress in a lion-skin and "savage the genitals" of women in his court- often in public.
Pretending that sexual perversion somehow appeared out of thin air in the last 50 years and that people before then all just had sex with the lights off just like the Film-Authority approved movies showed is shockingly ignorant.
Please don’t strawman what I wrote.

And you don’t think taking the highly specific sexual proclivities of the degenerate and libertine moneyed elite and extrapolating that to the Joe Schmoes of those times to be a gross generalization???

I’m going to lay out my bias right here for everyone to see:
I’ve seen this sentiment before and in my opinion it usually comes from leftists who believe in moral relativism.
I don’t buy into that train of thought.
Btw:
I’ve read my share of De Sade and Venus in furs.

For clarity’s sake I was referring to the pre- porn on the internet boom when getting access to pornographic material was harder and niche subject matter even more so.

Being something of an afficianado of Bettie Paige, and Tempest Storm’s pinups and media my conclusions were drawn from that source material.
There is a huge difference in what was considered risqué and pornographic then versus our standards now.
 

Lemmingwise

Welcome home
kiwifarms.net
And, of course, you draw the wrong conclusions. "Greatness" and sexual perversity aren't linked; it's just that we know more about great people's sex lives because no historian is going to write about the village idiot who tries to bite women on the bum.
You make a good point about historiography, but it isn't greatness that I'm referring to, but having the means to indulge in perversity. In that indulging, there is room to develop that perversity into more elaborateness.

And with the internet, everyone has the means to indulge in perversity, and reinforce the pathways in their brain to both reward seeking it out and plenty of supply to get ever deeper into it.
 

Senior Lexmechanic

Shitposting displeases the Omnissiah
kiwifarms.net
Please don’t strawman what I wrote.

And you don’t think taking the highly specific sexual proclivities of the degenerate and libertine moneyed elite and extrapolating that to the Joe Schmoes of those times to be a gross generalization???

I’m going to lay out my bias right here for everyone to see:
I’ve seen this sentiment before and in my opinion it usually comes from leftists who believe in moral relativism.
I don’t buy into that train of thought.
Btw:
I’ve read my share of De Sade and Venus in furs.

For clarity’s sake I was referring to the pre- porn on the internet boom when getting access to pornographic material was harder and niche subject matter even more so.

Being something of an afficianado of Bettie Paige, and Tempest Storm’s pinups and media my conclusions were drawn from that source material.
There is a huge difference in what was considered risqué and pornographic then versus our standards now.
I wouldn't call myself a leftist, and I'm not a moral relativist either. Maybe your issue is one of phrasing. Perhaps you would understand my position more if I phrased it as follows: Mankind is inherently debased and sinful and, without the guiding hand of Christ, will indulge in the most extreme and grotesque perversions willingly and joyfully, as our world is that of Satan and so is our hearts.

Despite this, I still don't believe that pornography is any better or worse than, say, coveting your neighbor's new car. Masturbation is venal, not mortal.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Lemmingwise

Recon

Tactical Autism Response Division
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
when the Israelian army took over the city Ramallah, and they started broadcasting pornography over every tv channel that they gained control over. Why did they do that?
Ok, ok. It's obviously to destabilize islam, which is the basis of the opposition's morale. Fun story, do you know what British officers would do to Muslims when they caught their people and wanted info back in colonial days? They'd tie the poor fucker up and slaughter a pig in front of him. Then they'd gut the pig. Then they'd begin sewing up their Muslim captive inside the corpse of the dead pig Skywalker style.
Then they'd start asking questions.
Very effective technique. No wonder they feel so much colonial guilt nowadays, they were absolute mad lads back in the day.
Turns out that attacking people through belief structure like this is great at getting, well... maybe not hearts, but minds. Definitely gets minds. Why mention this? Well, let's say you're in this situation but you're not a muzzie. You get sewed up in a pig. Are you gonna spill the beans all of a sudden? No, because your fighting spirit is not tied up in some hopelessly outdated revealed text taken literally. Not that it's great shakes being sewed up in a pig, mind you - but because you're not a superstitious exceptional individual from the previous millennium and as such, a piece of media cannot harm you or make you do something you don't want to.

I'm not an apologist, I'm just pointing something out. If porn can destabilize your social engine, you have a shit social engine.
Your mind is yours. Teach your children that.
Evolve to be stronger. The species will have to at some point.
 
Last edited:

BlastDoors41

kiwifarms.net
I wouldn't call myself a leftist, and I'm not a moral relativist either. Maybe your issue is one of phrasing. Perhaps you would understand my position more if I phrased it as follows: Mankind is inherently debased and sinful and, without the guiding hand of Christ, will indulge in the most extreme and grotesque perversions willingly and joyfully, as our world is that of Satan and so is our hearts.

Despite this, I still don't believe that pornography is any better or worse than, say, coveting your neighbor's new car. Masturbation is venal, not mortal.

Listen,
I don’t necessarily disagree with your assessment of human nature and religion’s role in mitigating our baser instincts.

Being of the eastern persuasion I hazard that you and I would come to similar conclusions about humanity’s moral compass just from different angles.

And I’m not calling you a leftist, I apologize for that.

Let me rephrase that I misread your initial critique as indicating that no culture before or after us has done anything better.

Left leaning types often pick out the worst examples of any society and culture in order to degrade and dismiss whatever good they may have possessed.
Mention the greatest generation and their accomplishments and the average lefty will reeeee about homophobia, civil rights*, women in kitchens and a laundry list of other things.

I’ve seen a fellow millennial dress her boomer mother down in front of me for merely suggesting that older people had a stronger sense of commitment to each other than people do now.
The thrust of her critique being that the nuclear family doesn’t have inherent advantages over other kinds of family arrangements (*hint: it does which is why even hunter gatherers feature it).


*(And yes I’m aware that the 1950s WW2 generation were responsible for the Civil Rights.)
 

Senior Lexmechanic

Shitposting displeases the Omnissiah
kiwifarms.net
Listen,
I don’t necessarily disagree with your assessment of human nature and religion’s role in mitigating our baser instincts.

Being of the eastern persuasion I hazard that you and I would come to similar conclusions about humanity’s moral compass just from different angles.

And I’m not calling you a leftist, I apologize for that.

Let me rephrase that I misread your initial critique as indicating that no culture before or after us has done anything better.

Left leaning types often pick out the worst examples of any society and culture in order to degrade and dismiss whatever good they may have possessed.
Mention the greatest generation and their accomplishments and the average lefty will reeeee about homophobia, civil rights*, women in kitchens and a laundry list of other things.

I’ve seen a fellow millennial dress her boomer mother down in front of me for merely suggesting that older people had a stronger sense of commitment to each other than people do now.
The thrust of her critique being that the nuclear family doesn’t have inherent advantages over other kinds of family arrangements (*hint: it does which is why even hunter gatherers feature it).


*(And yes I’m aware that the 1950s WW2 generation were responsible for the Civil Rights.)
1. And on the other hand, right-leaning types often gloss over or engage in apologia for aspects of the past which disrupt their idealized version of it.
2. Religion's role? You talk about it as if it weren't true. That wasn't an idle comparison: I am a devout Christian. I honestly believe both that the world would be a much better place if everyone lived by God's command, and that if we all lived by God's command the result would not even remotely resemble any past mode of civilization. I have a great distaste for civilization in general; society and culture inevitably becomes debased, due to the fallen nature of man. It is in the individual, or in small groups, that you can see God's love shining through the effluvia of this world of vice. Every civilization, including all those currently extant, fall short of the mark; but in many important aspects, I would say that the modern world is closer than most civilizations of the past. At least today we struggle less with "Love your neighbor as yourself", although we all still struggle with "Love the Lord with all your heart."
 

Strine

It had become a glimmering gorl,
kiwifarms.net
Pornography has existed whenever and wherever there was a medium for it, irrespective of whether the society at the time/place condemned it or not. Moral judgements about it are, in a way, pointless, since not only will it not go away, but driving it underground will both enhance its allure and open it up to truly immoral behaviour.

I personally approve of porn wholesale, except for actual cases of exploitation and abuse (as opposed to hysterical rhetoric of the Dworkin-MacKinnon kind). Art is full of porn, of women and men - the most famous sculpture in the world, theDavid of Michelangelo, is literally softcore gay porn (of a teenager, no less) but has so much power of image that it's simply not regarded as such. Porn is simply an idealised subject for stimulation, in arguably the same way as a painting is - and like I said, porn is inseparable from a lot of great art. Everybody has erotic desires, and most porn condemnation seems to be a puritanical attempt to police other people's thoughts. Porn may have moral ambiguity, but what I regard as truly immoral is people trying to suppress or ban it - to control the experience of other, adult, people, who may feel the opposite way - because they themselves have a problem with it.

Sexuality is an immutable part of the human experience, and can't be controlled by societies - only directed by them, into a decorum that is cast off as soon as two horny people are alone together anyway, because animal sex drive is much older and stronger than human social impulse. Basically, porn isn't going away, no matter its legality; so I think it should be produced in legitimacy with legal protections.
 

BlastDoors41

kiwifarms.net
1. And on the other hand, right-leaning types often gloss over or engage in apologia for aspects of the past which disrupt their idealized version of it.
2. Religion's role? You talk about it as if it weren't true. That wasn't an idle comparison: I am a devout Christian. I honestly believe both that the world would be a much better place if everyone lived by God's command, and that if we all lived by God's command the result would not even remotely resemble any past mode of civilization. I have a great distaste for civilization in general; society and culture inevitably becomes debased, due to the fallen nature of man. It is in the individual, or in small groups, that you can see God's love shining through the effluvia of this world of vice. Every civilization, including all those currently extant, fall short of the mark; but in many important aspects, I would say that the modern world is closer than most civilizations of the past. At least today we struggle less with "Love your neighbor as yourself", although we all still struggle with "Love the Lord with all your heart."
If I’m being cagey it’s because I didn’t know your beliefs and didn’t want to derail the thread into one giant screech fest about “lol you believe in the Sky Daddy, lolololol.”

I had no idea you weren’t a fedora tipper.

Do you get my drift?

I believe in cultural degradation for sure. I don’t see how anyone cannot with the bones of great civilizations littered through out history for us to find.
Certain individuals posit that it’s an inherent bias in our learning institutions towards progress; that the whole of humanity is a straight arrow going up. To suggest a cyclical history at all is to question the concept of progress. Therefore, everyone before us has to be stupid.

The current zeitgeist has me appalled by its naked sadism and narcissism. I’m convinced that the push for moral relativism by the left and the watering down of religion was done in order to deprive us of certain concepts.

Specifically, the ability to name a thing as right or wrong. Instead we use substitutes like “unethical”, and “boundaries.” Words that have less of sting per se on someone’s ego.
Taking away a person’s ability to conceptualize right and wrong, to verbalize it even, makes it easier to exploit them and it begins, IMO, with an attack (not critique) on religion.

It increasingly feels like society is being engineered by sociopaths to create victims and enablers.
 
Last edited:

Bum Driller

Cultural Appropriator & Cowboy Chemist
kiwifarms.net
I would add to the discussion, that while I answered to the poll that porn is neutral for the society at large, in essence I believe that it's more beneficial than detrimental to the human spiritual growth as an individual. If we don't confront and engage with all of our impulses and fantasies and thus learn to ride with them and steer where we want them to go, they will forever haunt us in the dark recesses of our minds. Trying to shut them out doesn't make them go away, it just empowers them and makes men more viable to be possessed by them and thus carry them out like mindless animals.

Demons lurk in every heart, and if we don't aspire to become their masters and shapers, we will eternally be their henchmen.
 

UnclePhil

Getting older in a changing, frightening world.
kiwifarms.net
Eh, all things in moderation. Using it every now and again for a ten minute wank before bed isn't going to summon an eldritch Old One. Having it lord over your life during every moment of your free alone time might not destroy the world either, but it's not good for you. Especially if you have a SO in the house, or, you know, kids you're supposed to be raising.

There is a problem with its rampant availability these days, particularly when it comes to children having private wi-fi access on every conceivable electronic tablet, phone, console, and thermos. It gets worse with kids using streaming services essentially as their sex ed because their parents are worthless. Porn isn't supposed to be sex ed. It's a glamour show for adults. Combined with the over-saturation of it and the normalization of outlying sexual practices (some of which we now call "genders"), that upsets the aforementioned balance.

Back in my day, we were just coming out of the era where leprechauns left video tapes in the woods. Getting porn was still an adventure, though, and a rare occasion. I think that helped us keep it in check. Like doing a line every now and then instead of a coke binge every weeknight.
 

A Wild Weeb

kiwifarms.net
I feel like porn should be a temeporary replacement for sex. If you start fapping for the sake of fapping it could be a possible issue.
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Recon

Ihavetinyweewee

But massive grotesque balls
kiwifarms.net
I would say porn is both good and bad. Its good because it gives(especially the sexual frustrated)some sort of sexual outlet.

They have done studies with rape statistics, countries with lax pronography laws: had considerly fewer sexual crimes.

It 's bad because it can give people an unhealthy view of sex/sexuality. Sex, I think, is supposed to be a fun way to express human bonding. Not just a series of sexual fetishes for carnal pleasure.

I think, like alchohol, if pornography is consumed responsibly: I think its perfectly fine. If its consumed obsessivley: It can create weird views of sex, people, and relationships. It can lead a person to become even more lonely/isolated....

As far as the limits, in the realm of thought, written or illustration; I think anything goes. The most fucked up shit you can think of

It becomes a criminal and evil act when REAL people get involved...

So if pedos want to have their fucked up fantasies in artwork or writing: I guess its ok. Its gross and disgusting, but no child is harmed.

If it starts involving real kids: no fucking way....
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlastDoors41

BlastDoors41

kiwifarms.net
I would add to the discussion, that while I answered to the poll that porn is neutral for the society at large, in essence I believe that it's more beneficial than detrimental to the human spiritual growth as an individual. If we don't confront and engage with all of our impulses and fantasies and thus learn to ride with them and steer where we want them to go, they will forever haunt us in the dark recesses of our minds. Trying to shut them out doesn't make them go away, it just empowers them and makes men more viable to be possessed by them and thus carry them out like mindless animals.

Demons lurk in every heart, and if we don't aspire to become their masters and shapers, we will eternally be their henchmen.
That’s assuming our desires and needs aren’t being engineered and manipulated.

If images didn’t have any power to influence, as opposed to just entertain, marketing wouldn’t be a billion dollar industry.

That’s the trick, to get you to believe that your consent and decisions weren’t engineered.
 
That’s assuming our desires and needs aren’t being engineered and manipulated.

If images didn’t have any power to influence, as opposed to just entertain, marketing wouldn’t be a billion dollar industry.

That’s the trick, to get you to believe that your consent and decisions weren’t engineered.
If marketing was such a science we wouldn't have seen Hillary Clinton flop in 2016.

Marketing is a billion dollar industry because it's based on selling shitty ideas to dumb rich people who want to be more rich. You know another billion dollar industry? Homeopathic medicine. Proven by science (or even just some basic critical thinking) NOT to work.
 
Yeah, about that all that incest porn....

Here is an unpopular opinion post on reddit (that became very popular). Then there is a pornhub spokesperson who said it was an antisemetic conspiracy theory that pornhub was pushing this because the owners are jewish.

The problem is, nobody had mentioned jews up to that point.


View attachment 855116

View attachment 855121

http://archive.fo/cJqiU
There's always been a connection to Jewish pornographers and the attack on the traditional WASPs who are the biggest consumers of pornography. Again a weird aspect of general attack on cultural institutions by cultural marxism. I don't think it's expressly Jewish rather than just people profit of the industry.

As for the incest inserts, this has been a recent trend that is being pushed by Porn Geek, and it's because of the algorithms they have to observe behavior.

They put out a salacious implied incest vid, the first five minutes is that, and then it's generic porn. But people are clicking on it, (Midwest America is the biggest incest vid viewer market IRCC.)

Porn is a business and a positive feedback loop, like Youtube. They will push content and suggestions that they know people will watch again and again because of market share, eyeballs, and literal dominance of the industry.

James Joyce had a fart fetish and was into buttfucking his wife. E.H Lawrence wrote self-insert porn of himself being gang-raped by swarthy Arabs, and it was published as part of a bestselling novel (Lawrence of Arabia). He also wrote one of the most scandalous novels of all time (Lady Chatterly's Lover). Mozart was sexually attracted to his cousin, and they exchanged obscene letters to each other. Mozart also wrote an ode to analingus. One of the degenerate popes was known for throwing a party where he had whores crawl naked on the ground for scattered chestnuts while guests masturbated on them. Nero would dress in a lion-skin and "savage the genitals" of women in his court- often in public.
Pretending that sexual perversion somehow appeared out of thin air in the last 50 years and that people before then all just had sex with the lights off just like the Film-Authority approved movies showed is shockingly ignorant.
You might want to check your sources, your thinking D.H. Lawrence, and T.E Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia.) Neither are the same person.

Alternatively, if you look up the works of St. Thomas Aquinas (the animal guy) He wrote some of the first treatise of psychological observation of sexual perversions in humans as a manual to be used for guidance by the Catholic lay preachers in order to prevent those perversions. The Catholic church buried the documents inside of one of the Vaticans secret libraries, because they didn't want to believe the observations were true. (It's slowly getting released over time. Aquinas was a really good doctor, and even theorized how sexual dysfunctions occur.)

Also if you look up the work of Alfred Kinsey, his studies of sexuality in the 1940's and 1950's were ground breaking for the time, but not widely shared outside of the psychology community because it confirmed that a) humans are sexual beings b) They will find a myriad of ways to express that sexuality c) perversions like transgenderism, bi-sexuality, homosexuality, and cross dressing were more common than initial thought. (homosexuality and bi-sexuality were considered taboo for that period.)
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: ATaxingWoman
Tags
None

About Us

The Kiwi Farms is about eccentric individuals and communities on the Internet. We call them lolcows because they can be milked for amusement or laughs. Our community is bizarrely diverse and spectators are encouraged to join the discussion.

We do not place intrusive ads, host malware, sell data, or run crypto miners with your browser. If you experience these things, you have a virus. If your malware system says otherwise, it is faulty.

Supporting the Forum

How to Help

The Kiwi Farms is constantly attacked by insane people and very expensive to run. It would not be here without community support.

BTC: 1DgS5RfHw7xA82Yxa5BtgZL65ngwSk6bmm
ETH: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
BAT: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
LTC: LSZsFCLUreXAZ9oyc9JRUiRwbhkLCsFi4q
XMR: 438fUMciiahbYemDyww6afT1atgqK3tSTX25SEmYknpmenTR6wvXDMeco1ThX2E8gBQgm9eKd1KAtEQvKzNMFrmjJJpiino