snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Non-UL Chat > NFBSK Gone Wild!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 19 February 2014, 07:21 PM
Sue's Avatar
Sue Sue is offline
 
Join Date: 26 December 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 9,210
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloe View Post
He certainly saw his classmate's role in porn as somehow noteworthy, and, I suspect, titillating. If porn it's something it's ok for people to watch, it's something it's ok for people to do. If not, not.
Again, sure, but where is the hypocrisy? I suspect most people would consider finding out someone they know is a "porn starlet" to be noteworthy and would probably tell others about it. It says a lot about his character that he broke a promise he made - possibly a promise he never had any intention of keeping - but it doesn't make him hypocritical unless he never admitted how he found out who she was. I didn't see that in the article but if that was the case then I'd agree with you.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 19 February 2014, 07:25 PM
Chloe's Avatar
Chloe Chloe is offline
 
Join Date: 13 September 2004
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 39,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sue View Post
Again, sure, but where is the hypocrisy? I suspect most people would consider finding out someone they know is a "porn starlet" to be noteworthy and would probably tell others about it. It says a lot about his character that he broke a promise he made - possibly a promise he never had any intention of keeping - but it doesn't make him hypocritical unless he never admitted how he found out who she was. I didn't see that in the article but if that was the case then I'd agree with you.
I think it's hypocritical to judge people who perform in the porn industry when one personally consumes porn.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 20 February 2014, 01:38 AM
Hero_Mike's Avatar
Hero_Mike Hero_Mike is offline
 
 
Join Date: 06 April 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ & Hamilton, ON
Posts: 7,267
Canada

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard W View Post
Which bit? My anecdote?
No - the fact that there's such a thing as a "porn star" look.

Quote:
The woman I saw wasn't getting her "look" from clothes, hair and makeup. She seemed to be in her mid-20s and had very large breast implants that didn't even pretend to be natural, and other evidence of plastic surgery such as very inflated lips. I really don't see many people who look like that, and it seems to be a typical enough porn star look that it made me wonder if she was a porn star.
Is it not possible for people to have plastic surgery and not be porn stars? What if the woman was, say, a stripper, or a model, or a magician's assistant (where her exotic appearance has the audience watching her, and not the "sleight of hand" necessary to perform the illusion)? It's not a necessity to be a porn star to look like that, any more than it is necessary to look like that to be a porn star.

Case in point - people with extensive and visible tattoos are no longer side-show performers, porn stars, or former inmates.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 20 February 2014, 01:51 AM
Hero_Mike's Avatar
Hero_Mike Hero_Mike is offline
 
 
Join Date: 06 April 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ & Hamilton, ON
Posts: 7,267
Canada

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloe View Post
I think it's hypocritical to judge people who perform in the porn industry when one personally consumes porn.
Sorry for the double post, but define "consume"...

While there is nothing truly "free" in this world, I think that in this era of the internet, a great many people contribute no actual money for the porn they view. There's a continuum here - the people who buy DVDs, stream video, or get paid memberships are in the first tier, those who visit website where there is advertising revenue from their traffic are in the 2nd tier, and those who download through file sharing are in the third. No actual money leaves the pocket of the people in the 2nd and 3rd tier, so I question the use of the term "consumer" because by not generating revenue, it doesn't generate demand.

Consider this situation - what if no new pornography was generated, and those who "enjoy" it had to satisfy themselves by watching what is already out there. I say this because unlike other entertainment, porn is not all that different now from before. Compare it to television - it isn't "current events" sensitive like, say, The Tonight Show or The View, and people don't want it to be "reality television". Compare it to movies - the stories don't really change (because in most cases, there are no stories), and the movies do not rely upon improved technology (3D was supposed to "revolutionize" porn but it didn't, and it doesn't require the CGI required for a movie like, say, The Hobbit). I'm fairly sure that every genre is widely available already, and that the only attraction for "new" porn is a preference for some individual performer. You could easily dub or subtitle foreign-movies too without a real loss in the viewing experience. Would people out there complain because, literally, they needed "new" porn to enjoy?

In any case, for so many people, all the porn they want is available, essentially, for free, so how is there new demand for it?
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 20 February 2014, 02:17 AM
Avril's Avatar
Avril Avril is offline
 
Join Date: 07 August 2002
Location: Princeton, NJ
Posts: 10,547
Default

Hairstyles?
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 20 February 2014, 03:01 AM
RichardM RichardM is offline
 
Join Date: 27 March 2004
Location: Las Cruces, NM
Posts: 4,677
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloe View Post
IME, men who call themselves "gentlemen" are often some of the worst misogynists.
Some are but then they probably are the ones who go to the clubs.

ETA: From the Oxford dictionary - 1a chivalrous, courteous, or honorable man: ‘he behaved like a perfect gentleman’

Not sure whether or not the term 'lady' has the same connotations. Or what the corresponding term is in general useage today.

Last edited by RichardM; 20 February 2014 at 03:08 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 20 February 2014, 03:13 AM
RichardM RichardM is offline
 
Join Date: 27 March 2004
Location: Las Cruces, NM
Posts: 4,677
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hero_Mike View Post
Sorry for the double post, but define "consume"...
You are a consumer by watching in the same sense that you are a consumer watching broadcast TV. The ads pay for it and your watching is what pays for the ads. So you are paying for porn.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 20 February 2014, 03:47 AM
Hero_Mike's Avatar
Hero_Mike Hero_Mike is offline
 
 
Join Date: 06 April 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ & Hamilton, ON
Posts: 7,267
Canada

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardM View Post
You are a consumer by watching in the same sense that you are a consumer watching broadcast TV. The ads pay for it and your watching is what pays for the ads. So you are paying for porn.
Not quite - aside from one or two people I know who have literally forsaken all television, most everyone I know pays for their cable or satellite TV, and some of that money finds its way into the pockets of the networks, does it not?

Yes, this is a fraction of the advertising revenue, but it counts. Few people would say that their television (aside from those few who do rely upon "over-the-air" broadcasts) is truly as "free" as the content they can get over the internet. The money paid to the internet provider doesn't find its way back to the content provider, does it?
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 20 February 2014, 04:03 AM
erwins's Avatar
erwins erwins is offline
 
Join Date: 04 April 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,375
Default

There's obviously a market for it, since it keeps being produced and paid for. And whether one pays directly or indirectl (by viewing ads) a viewer of porn is a consumer of it. You're taking part in the market for porn in a way that creates demand for it.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 20 February 2014, 04:59 AM
RichardM RichardM is offline
 
Join Date: 27 March 2004
Location: Las Cruces, NM
Posts: 4,677
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hero_Mike View Post
Not quite - aside from one or two people I know who have literally forsaken all television, most everyone I know pays for their cable or satellite TV, and some of that money finds its way into the pockets of the networks, does it not?

Yes, this is a fraction of the advertising revenue, but it counts. Few people would say that their television (aside from those few who do rely upon "over-the-air" broadcasts) is truly as "free" as the content they can get over the internet. The money paid to the internet provider doesn't find its way back to the content provider, does it?
Despite paying for cable/satellite/internet/whatever TV, there are still ads. Thus for cable or satellite TV, you are paying twice. And by the way, I watch TV both over the air and via satellite. I 'pay' for both. I am paying double right now for watching the local to Dallas stations because of the grief it causes me to watch every Republican candidate for every possible office, including I think, dog catcher, run against Obama. As far as I know, Obama is not running for Agriculture Commissioner nor does that office have a thing to do with gun rights or immigration. Doesn't stop the Bush now running from saying that is what he stands for. Sorry for the thread drift.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 20 February 2014, 08:25 AM
Richard W's Avatar
Richard W Richard W is offline
 
Join Date: 19 February 2000
Location: High Wycombe, UK
Posts: 26,444
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hero_Mike View Post
Is it not possible for people to have plastic surgery and not be porn stars?
Yes, that's exactly why I explicitly said as much in my post, and why I "wondered" whether she was a porn star rather than "assuming" she was a porn star.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 20 February 2014, 12:49 PM
Chloe's Avatar
Chloe Chloe is offline
 
Join Date: 13 September 2004
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 39,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hero_Mike View Post
Sorry for the double post, but define "consume"...
Read or watch or enjoy would also work. I don't know why someone who was watching porn for free and being judgmental about people who work in porn would be less hypocritical than someone who paid for it.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 20 February 2014, 12:55 PM
snopes's Avatar
snopes snopes is offline
 
Join Date: 18 February 2000
Location: California
Posts: 109,660
Icon07

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hero_Mike View Post
No actual money leaves the pocket of the people in the 2nd and 3rd tier, so I question the use of the term "consumer" because by not generating revenue, it doesn't generate demand.
A "consumer' is a person who uses a commodity or service. Whether that person is paying (directly or indirectly) for that commodity or service is irrelevant to his status as a consumer.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 20 February 2014, 01:08 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is online now
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 26,705
Default

For me, the hypocritical actions are not so much the guy who saw her and told all his frat buddies about it (that's another issue) but the scores of people who instantly condemned her for working in porn, but said nothing about him watching porn.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 20 February 2014, 01:42 PM
Alarm's Avatar
Alarm Alarm is offline
 
Join Date: 26 May 2011
Location: Nepean, ON
Posts: 5,812
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GenYus234 View Post
For me, the hypocritical actions are not so much the guy who saw her and told all his frat buddies about it (that's another issue) but the scores of people who instantly condemned her for working in porn, but said nothing about him watching porn.
Exactly. Either porn is wrong, and it's wrong for everyone. or it's not and then it's not wrong for anyone.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 20 February 2014, 02:41 PM
Sue's Avatar
Sue Sue is offline
 
Join Date: 26 December 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 9,210
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GenYus234 View Post
For me, the hypocritical actions are not so much the guy who saw her and told all his frat buddies about it (that's another issue) but the scores of people who instantly condemned her for working in porn, but said nothing about him watching porn.
Same here. Which was why I was surprised that he was the one being singled out for being hypocritical. I can criticize him, and will, for breaking a promise, or making one just to "be nice" in the moment but having no intention of keeping that promise. But that's not being hypocritical. I can't really blame him for wanting to tell other people what he found out about a fellow student. I'd be surprised if most students (hell, most anyone really) wouldn't have wanted to be the first with that kind of news. I don't think that makes someone hypocritical. Unless there is a definition of that word I haven't heard before.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 20 February 2014, 03:19 PM
Chloe's Avatar
Chloe Chloe is offline
 
Join Date: 13 September 2004
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 39,316
Default

Why is it news unless there's some hypocrisy involved?
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 20 February 2014, 04:38 PM
Jay Temple's Avatar
Jay Temple Jay Temple is offline
 
Join Date: 25 September 2003
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 9,104
Default

One might criticize her for going to a school expensive enough to make this line of work necessary, instead of going to a state school that she could afford without it. Obviously, that's not what's going on, though.

(The Onion had an article on "Top 50 Perfectly Good State Schools".)
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 20 February 2014, 04:56 PM
Lainie's Avatar
Lainie Lainie is offline
 
Join Date: 29 August 2005
Location: Suburban Columbus, OH
Posts: 74,587
Default

One might, but there's no reason to unless one feels there's something immoral about "this line of work." Which is one's right, of course, but then I would hope one is not a consumer of the products of this line of work.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 20 February 2014, 05:14 PM
Chloe's Avatar
Chloe Chloe is offline
 
Join Date: 13 September 2004
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 39,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Temple View Post
One might criticize her for going to a school expensive enough to make this line of work necessary, instead of going to a state school that she could afford without it. Obviously, that's not what's going on, though.
Why criticize her for that, unless you're also criticizing the other students spending similar amounts on their education?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What Porn Stars Do When the Porn Industry Shuts Down snopes NFBSK Gone Wild! 18 09 January 2014 02:42 PM
Stallone sold his dog to fund his movie career? snopes Entertainment 1 17 August 2010 01:11 PM
The price of leadership snopes Snopes Spotting 0 11 March 2009 07:54 AM
The Iron Duke snopes Military 0 27 September 2008 05:06 AM
Why would Gilbert allude to American roulette in "The Grand Duke"? GravyTrain Entertainment 4 02 October 2007 05:51 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.