# Pornography



## tecwritr (Oct 28, 2008)

I have some questions for all of you.  What is pornography?  Why do so many people use the term when they are discussing sexually explicit books, movies, photos, etc., with the intention of making it sound dirty or disgusting?  Personally I prefer the term "sexually explicit".


----------



## Guest (Dec 27, 2008)

"I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that." -- Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart on "hard-core pornography"


----------



## Lizzy (Nov 26, 2008)

I think that the def of pornography is up to each person. I know this is weird but if i saw a xxx movie i would probly call it pornography but i read the same stuff in books and i dont think of it as porn, just sex.


----------



## Lotus (Oct 31, 2008)

I believe pornography is a synonym for sexually explicit. If there's an underlying notion of dirtiness or disgusting with one word over the other, it's really just in the eyes of the reader.


----------



## Guest (Dec 27, 2008)

Debbie Does Dallas = porn
2girls1cup or Saw = pornography


----------



## chobitz (Nov 25, 2008)

Bacardi Jim said:


> Debbie Does Dallas = porn
> 2girls1cup or Saw = pornography


Saw = torture porn IMO which is worse than any kind of 'sexual porn'.

Torture porn IMO is ruining the horror genre *sigh*

Anyway porn is in the eye of the beholder. I for instance have a subscription to Playboy. Many would call that porn but TBH it has some of the most intelligent articles I've ever read and some great writers including Stephen King have started as contributors to Playboy.

BTW 2girls1cup is just disgusting ewww


----------



## Guest (Dec 27, 2008)

chobitz said:


> Saw = torture porn IMO which is worse than any kind of 'sexual porn'.
> 
> Torture porn IMO is ruining the horror genre *sigh*
> 
> ...


I agree with everything you said 100%.

Except.... most of King's early stories were published in _Gallery_ (which is much more explicit in its pictorials) and not _Playboy_.


----------



## ScottBooks (Oct 28, 2008)

Bacardi Jim said:


> ... most of King's early stories were published in _Gallery_ (which is much more explicit in its pictorials) and not _Playboy_.


Both of which would be really lame on Kindle.


----------



## Guest (Dec 28, 2008)

ScottBooks said:


> Both of which would be really lame on Kindle.


HA!


----------



## Guest (Dec 28, 2008)

what is 2girls1cup?  is it like ramien?


----------



## Guest (Dec 28, 2008)

Vampyre said:


> what is 2girls1cup? is it like ramien?


You don't really want to know. Trust me. But it's easy enough to google, if you can't contain your curiosity.


----------



## Leslie (Apr 7, 2008)

You know what? I don't think this thread is contributing anything to Kindleboards. This is just me (Leslie) stepping in, not wearing a mod hat (although I suppose I always am) but really...there are definitions out there of pornography, obscenity, etc. Read the whole Lenny Bruce history, it's interesting. And the Hustler guy, too. But giving veiled references to gross YouTubes is just gross. Let's just end it, okay?

L


----------



## Guest (Dec 28, 2008)

First of all, there was nothing "veiled" about my reference. It was open and direct. Secondly, I was using the examples I did to make a point--one which Maggie got but possibly you didn't. (?) That video and the "Saw" movies are celebrations and exhibitions of depravity and grotesquerie _for their own sake_. They offer absolutely *nothing* of any value to any reasonable person to go along with their terrible nature.  I don't feel that way about most of what is traditionally labelled "pornography," much of which I enjoy. Thus to me they are much more "obscene" than is most porn.

But if you want the whole conversation stopped, I won't argue.


----------



## tecwritr (Oct 28, 2008)

Wait a minute.  Maybe I should have titled this explicit sex instead of pornography.  The point I was trying to make, and did a very lame job of it, we can discuss religious fiction/non-fiction, spiritual fiction, Christian devotional reading, love romance and paranormal novels, etc., shouldn’t we be able to discuss sexually explicit novels?  Yes, we must watch how we discuss them but still, in my opinion, this genre is as legitimate as the others I’ve mentioned.

btw if I see a topic that isn’t my cup of tea, I don’t read it.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Book discussions are one thing, but sorry, haven't seen anything in this thread yet discussing books...  Your initial post did not invite people to discuss books only the definition of pornography including in "books, movies, photos, etc.," which, whatever your intent was, invites exactly the kind of responses it got....  I have to agree, a list of hot links to these visuals does not serve the purpose of Kindleboards....

Betsy

--edited for clarity


----------



## tecwritr (Oct 28, 2008)

Sorry, but I have not mentioned xxx rated sites and would never do so. On many occasions there have been discussions about things that were not specifically about a particular book or Kindle.

The question is "Can we talk about books that are sexually explicit if we want to?" I do know that one answer will be that if they have a legitimate plot and aren't just about sex then we can.

If the answer is no then I feel that it would be censorship. In which case I could, but would not, ask you to remove:
All references to religious non-fiction because it might offend people who worship a different God or are Atheists.
All romance novels because they might offend some ones religious beliefs
etc.
etc.

btw. I have know idea what books that might be discussed.

Jim, I think I may have joined the ranks of the rebel rousers


----------



## Shizu (Oct 27, 2008)

tecwritr said:


> btw if I see a topic that isn't my cup of tea, I don't read it.


True. I don't read a lot of thread.

Just because you can post doesn't mean you can post anything. If the Mods think the topic doesn't fit in this board, then it is not. Some you agree some you don't but that is the way it is. The Mods have their idea of how this board should be and they have to moderate to keep the board.

When I had my own site and there was a post which I didn't think it goes with my site, I deleted the post. I didn't want my site to turn into something I didn't want. It was only a post but if I leave that alone, it might turn into 2 post then 3 and so on that might change the color of my site. In this case, 2 of the Mods said no... so that should tell something.

My 2 cent.


----------



## Jeff (Oct 28, 2008)

Harvey said it well when he urged everyone to stay within the bounds of a family community so that his daughters could view this forum without seeing anything offensive.

There's already a thread here somewhere about books by D. H. Lawrence. I, for one, see no reason why Lady Chatterley's Lover couldn’t be discussed while avoiding any words that would be offensive.

(For those who may not know it, Lady Chatterley's Lover was considered to be smut in 1928.)

As to censorship, Shizu is quite right, internet domains are not public property.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Tecwriter--



tecwritr said:


> Sorry, but I have not mentioned xxx rated sites and would never do so. On many occasions there have been discussions about things that were not specifically about a particular book or Kindle.


Sorry for the misunderstanding--*I *never said *you *mentioned xxx sites, just that that's what was being posted and what was being posted didn't serve Kboard.



tecwritr said:


> .... shouldn't we be able to discuss sexually explicit novels? Yes, we must watch how we discuss them but still, in my opinion, this genre is as legitimate as the others I've mentioned....


I was pointing out no books had been discussed as yet in your thread, despite it apparently being your desire. It's certainly a legitimate genre for discussion and in fact has been discussed, though not often.

Your most recent post is much better and a valid discussion point. I think this is another case where an accurate subject line serves everyone--if we know what the topic is about, we can make an informed decision on whether to read or not....

And I guess I don't see good discussion as rabblerousing....



Betsy


----------



## tecwritr (Oct 28, 2008)

Betsy,

Thank you.  You did a much better job of clarifying why I started this thread than I did.

Good grief.  Eighteen years in technical writing and I've forgotten how to put my thoughts into words.


----------



## Guest (Dec 28, 2008)

I never mentioned or linked to any XXX sites either.  I mentioned one specific infamous video that somehow, despite its nature, became enough of a cultural phenomenon that even the late-night talk show hosts made jokes about it.  And I mentioned it in as negative a light as possible.

*sigh*


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

LOL!

I worked for many years in an office that wrote regulations (met my husband there, but that's definitely off topic).  We learned that there was NO WAY to write something that SOMEONE wouldn't misinterpret!  SO, no problem!

It's why, though I don't like acronyms and try to "use my words" as we say to the grandkids, I do find LOL! and the emoticons useful. 

Back on topic, some of the free books have been fairly explicit, which usually elicits a discussion in the Free Book thread, to the effect, "be forewarned if this is your cup of tea" but we've never gone much farther than that.

Betsy


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Sigh..

Perhaps I shouldn't have tried to use a generic description of what I perceived as the links that were being posted.  Nor did I mean to single out one individual; there were several posts I was trying to address. I'll remove it as that term should not be the major point of discussion. 

Sorry.   

Betsy


----------



## Guest (Dec 28, 2008)

Betsy:  I don't want to stir anything up.  Honestly.  It just seemed that first Leslie and then you were unfairly jumping on me for somehow "promoting pornography" merely by mentioning the name of the video.  I was, in fact, doing exactly the opposite--holding it up as an example of the worst (and most harmful) kind of cultural garbage.  It seems that my intent and anything I had to say about it somehow got obscured by my mentioning it by name at all. 

And you know I'm not one to sit silently when I think I'm being treated unfairly.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

As you can see by my "xxx" misstep, sometimes you can obscure what you're trying to say by how you say it... 

Betsy


----------



## Kirstin (Oct 29, 2008)

hmmm.....  the only reference in here I recognized was "Saw"....  perhaps I am porn challenged?


----------



## Guest (Dec 28, 2008)

And I don't see ANY links anywhere in this thread other than the ones in people's signatures.


----------



## Leslie (Apr 7, 2008)

I don't think it's any big surprise that I read and enjoy books that have lots of sex in them. I think of them as erotic although I know others would say "erotica" or even soft core porn. I'd be happy -- and would enjoy -- discussions of the books I have read and maybe getting new suggestions on other books to read.

tecwritr, I think your error was to start this thread here ("Not Quite Kindle") with the generic title pornography, which seemed to get people off into a general discussion of what is pornography and then giving examples...mostly to film and video, not books. And that is why I posted my "I'd rather not get into this..." message.

Sorry if I confused people and I really wasn't trying to jump on anyone. Thanks for understanding!

L


----------



## mom133d (aka Liz) (Nov 25, 2008)

Back when CIPA (Children's Internet Protection Act) was first being discussed, I was working in the public computer lab at our local library. My boss quickly taught me to use the term "sexually explict" rather than pornography. 

Porn is a matter of personal taste, upbringing and the morals of the community is the best difference I can use. There is/was a case in Staunton, VA of the owner of a "porn" shop. (I insist on calling it an Adult store) He has been charged on several counts of selling porn and at has been tried on at least 2 of the charges. The poor jury had to watch the videos in question. 1 video the jury decided was just in poor taste but not porn, the other, they decided was. One of the local papers showed some of the questions asked of the then potential jurors. One gentleman was in the Navy and was asked if he had ever watched porn. his answer was "Yes" and then they asked where he got it. his answer? "I'm in the Navy" LOL


----------



## Teninx (Oct 27, 2008)

The term "pornographic" has a meaning differing from "sexually explicit". I'll use the term that I find apt and those who disagree with me can cluck thier tounges and cringe.


----------



## Jack C (Dec 26, 2008)

!!? Oh....terribly sorry. I saw the subject line & just assumed that this is where we kept our pornography


----------



## Teninx (Oct 27, 2008)

C'mon, Jack. It's in the sock drawer just like always


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

I have a pilot friend who does a lot of stopovers and he told my husband he always checks under the mattress in the hotel to see what mags might have been left behind.  I don't know if this is a secret pilot thing or just a people-who-read-those-kind-of-mag thing.

Betsy


----------



## Leslie (Apr 7, 2008)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> I have a pilot friend who does a lot of stopovers and he told my husband he always checks under the mattress in the hotel to see what mags might have been left behind. I don't know if this is a secret pilot thing or just a people-who-read-those-kind-of-mag thing.
> 
> Betsy


Well, according to Dan Savage, something like 100% of men and 98% of women read/look at porn -- but it's never entered my head to look under the mattress in a hotel! LOL. I just flip on the TV 

L


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Even since he told us this, we forget to ever check, I guess it's not very high on our list...

Betsy


----------



## robin.goodfellow (Nov 17, 2008)

> I don't know if this is a secret pilot thing


Trust me: it's no secret. I worked with pilots for years, which is a little like trying to herd cats, but without the possibility of results.


----------



## Leslie (Apr 7, 2008)

Which of course, reminds me of this!


----------



## Jack C (Dec 26, 2008)

robin.goodfellow said:


> ... I worked with pilots for years, which is a little like trying to herd cats, but without the possibility of results.


Robin, once again with comedy gold


----------



## tecwritr (Oct 28, 2008)

From pornography to hearding cats.  Talk about getting off the subject.  I almost feel like I should starta "Sexually Explicit" thread and lock out this one.


----------



## Jack C (Dec 26, 2008)

well, I can't speak for everyone here, but I know that I personally wasnt thinking anything sexual when I thought about herding cats. 

well...I wasn't before you posted. thanks for ruining an innocent moment of cat-related jockularity


----------



## robin.goodfellow (Nov 17, 2008)

> well...I wasn't before you posted. thanks for ruining an innocent moment of cat-related jockularity


rofl


----------



## tecwritr (Oct 28, 2008)

I'm allergic to cats.  When I'm around them my eyes water and I start sneezing.  If I'm around them too long my eyes swell shut.  Now THAT's pornographic.


----------



## Jack C (Dec 26, 2008)

haha! you stole my line....I was midway through reading the sentence '...my eyes water and I start sneezing' & I was thinking 'NOW we're getting filthy'


----------

