Should Porn Be Considered “Free Speech” and Thus Protected By The First Amendment?

The problem with pornography is that it’s no longer an issue of First Amendment protected speech or content, as it’s now an artificial manufactured product full of “bad actors”, and is being used as a tool to coerce women into prostitution. The vast majority of men involved in the industry serve as “bad actors”, as they are not at all capable of creating the scenarios they experience in their “business” in real life. And in so doing, they present and typify “intimate” interactions with women that are unnatural and put both the women and men involved at odds with the natural order of desire, affection, consent, trust, relationships, and even reproduction. These male “porn actors” are TERRIBLE examples of physical intimacy, they are TERRIBLE lovers, they are immature, inexperienced, and instead work to fill the gap with fanciful extrapolations of “alpha behavior”, an egotistical take on what it is to be a guy that has lots of sexual experiences with women. They don’t pet or fondle a woman’s body, they slap instead of caress, they clap her breasts or squeeze them forcefully. They smack her in the face, they make a show of inflicting pain during intimacy, as if this is the natural course of events when a man has sexual intercourse with a woman. There is no meeting of their bodies, no cuddling, no affection, because they have to create space for camera angles. The end “product” is comical, certainly not genuine or authentic, and dangerous to shaping the expectations and standards of future “lovers-in-training”.

Porn is now a damaging, socially subversive, artificially manufactured product. Not a genuine source of self-expression or “free speech". And how is it “free speech” if the women involved have to sign a contract, and perform for an audience? For profit? That’s not “free”.

The porn industry teaches women to not just “fall for” a relaxed standard for what constitutes consent and a true path to intimacy, e.g. desire and affection, but attempts to rigidly pinhole and force the very definition of what defines consent into a paid transaction by requiring a signed contract. And once that contract is signed, a bumbling inexperienced male can then do what he wants to her and she’s the one expected to put on a good enough show to trick the audience into thinking she’s enjoying it. This serves to teach and instruct other women how to partake in this same dysfunctional experience. This is ALL part of a widespread push to normalize prostitution for women. But more than that it’s an attempt to capture the market of sex and intimacy, to put a fence around its continued use by the rest of the population. They have attempted to force state legislators to introduce legislation that allows women to withdraw consent during “normal” traditional sex. Clearly this would serve to entrap men, vilify the male population at large, and drive a permanent wedge between men and women. They’ve even introduced the idea of the “Condom Rape Tax”, the idea that men who are known to have had “unprotected” sex, are somehow wrong and immoral, and even rapists. This idea is STUPID. It is contrary to the natural order of relationships and having children. It is simply another modern predation and exploitation of humanity. How DARE they attempt to tell men that not wearing a condom makes them a bad person. That is a travesty, that is not capitalism, that is CANNIBALISM.

But they still attempted to use this to vilify Julian Assange in 2010.

Kamala Harris, an ex-presidential candidate in the current 2020 election, ran on a platform advocating the legalization of prostitution. She also served as California’s attorney general from 2011-2017. As the attorney general, she fed California’s prison-industrial complex. The legal community at large, hoping to make money off the litigation and working as “bounty hunters” for the prison-industrial complex, work to entrap and outlaw those that are truly gifted in the sensual arts, natural seducers, those who adore and nurture women in their physically intimate endeavors. This is for a few different reasons. Clearly they want to “capture” the market, but also, these types of people can clearly see the twisted machinations at work and can easily identify the utter lack of any natural expression of intimacy or affection going on. And if these people are somehow removed, the true pathways to intimacy might be concealed. You’d have to buy their commercialized “sex products” or be locked out. If you didn’t purchase their condom product, and engage in prostitution, you would be putting yourself at risk of a rape charge. It’s all about the money, they’re trying to outlaw sex outside their industry.

You can vilify pornography in knee jerk fashion all you want, and rightfully so, but clearly there is more to the discussion than simply stating that “porn is bad”. Please be advised, there is much more at stake.

Original Post:
https://www.manwhore.org/is-porn-free-speech-protected-by-first-amendment/
 

VNvet

Kingfisher
Horus said:
It would be easier to successfully enforce a bank on drugs than enforce a bank on pornography.
We shouldn't want it because it's difficult to enforce?

Terrible reasoning. If there's a will, then we can figure it out.

As for drugs, the majority of drug smuggling and promotion is from the CIA and other Intelligence operations. I assume porn comes from the same place.
 

Handsome Creepy Eel

Owl
Gold Member
Unless the actors are sitting down to discuss politics and literature before having sex, there's literally no speech in porn. There's no message or artistic expression. It's just... porn.
 

Leonard D Neubache

Owl
Gold Member
Dear (Pornhub proprietor),

I regret to inform you that during the year to date there have been 3,178 credible allegations against your company of breaching codes relating to the provision of pornographic content to those under the age of 18.

The applicable fine for each breach of the code is $10,000. You may dispute these fines individually but must do so no later than two weeks from the time this notice was issued.

Due to the number and severity of the breaches the Department of Justice has issued a freeze on your company and personal accounts and assets as well as those of your board or directors, and furthermore we have revoked the travel privileges of all parties listed above. These steps will be withdrawn subsequent to the resolution of any class actions against your company.

We thank you for your presumed co-operation in these matters.

---

Yes, this is why the resistance to satanic globalism will always be funneled by our masters into the puerile quest for free-dumb. Free-dumb was precisely what allowed these degenerate people to spread their filth and what drives them to create threads like this.

They are not afraid of free-dumb. They are afraid of a stalwart peoples with a strong, sustainable culture that drives a rule of law which will bring a noose down around their degenerate necks. Why do you think their media engines still trumpet free-dumb free-dumb free-dumb constantly while simultaneously shitting hatefully on literally everything else to do with Western society. Why do you think they still shudder fearfully at the mention of the Spanish Inquisition?

Because one of these things is an effective defense against them while the other is not.
 

questor70

Ostrich
What bothers me more than the presence of porn is the lack of limits to access adult content in general. The world was a better place when it was difficult for kids to see this stuff. Having it such a free-for-all sends a message, culturally, that it's all equally wholesome. Not just talking about hardcore porn, but violence, swearing, and generally crude/coarse behavior. It was one thing when, let's say, rock stars were living on the wild side back in the 70s and 80s, because we at least had societal norms to compare them to. We knew that kind of thing was "out there". You had normal society in a bubble and the wild side on the other and if you decided to take a walk on the wild side you knew you did so at your own risk. Now hedonism has been normalized and social stigma eliminated.
 
You can vilify pornography in knee jerk fashion all you want, and rightfully so, but clearly there is more to the discussion than simply stating that “porn is bad”. Please be advised, there is much more at stake.
Source - "manwhore.com". My sides.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
questor70 said:
What bothers me more than the presence of porn is the lack of limits to access adult content in general. The world was a better place when it was difficult for kids to see this stuff. Having it such a free-for-all sends a message, culturally, that it's all equally wholesome. Not just talking about hardcore porn, but violence, swearing, and generally crude/coarse behavior. It was one thing when, let's say, rock stars were living on the wild side back in the 70s and 80s, because we at least had societal norms to compare them to. We knew that kind of thing was "out there". You had normal society in a bubble and the wild side on the other and if you decided to take a walk on the wild side you knew you did so at your own risk. Now hedonism has been normalized and social stigma eliminated.
One of the main goals of porn is to eliminate Christianity and the belief in God. Early architects of the Frankfurt School like Gyorg Lukacz specifically used porn as a tool to de-Christianize eastern Europe:


At the Moscow meeting, the conspirators decided that what was needed was a more gradual “cultural revolution,” or what eventually came to be known as “cultural Marxism,” in the West and beyond. To advance that program, the subversives agreed on a sinister but brilliant plan. This would involve the destruction of traditional religion and the Christian culture it produced, the collapse of sexual morality and the deliberate undermining of the family, and a wrecking ball to infiltrate and demolish the existing institutions.

Some of these men had experience. For instance, Lukacs, who served as “minister of education and culture” in the Bolshevik Hungarian regime of Bela Kun, had introduced all manner of perversion and grotesque “sex education” in public schools, starting in elementary school. It was part of a campaign to destroy “bourgeois” Christian morality and sexual ethics among the youth. The objective was to eventually de-Christianize Hungary, thereby facilitating a total communist restructuring of the human mind and all of society.

Lukács then was able to try his nihilist hand at governing as a Commissar for Education and Culture.

He knew that in order to get people to accept communism, the people would need to be culturally aligned with atheism, the irrelevance of the family, the acceptance of diversity, and the tolerance of multiculturalism. In order to achieve this, he would need to undermine the Christian family structure by promoting teenage promiscuity, teenage rebellion and arrested development.

Basically, all Lukács was interested in was leveling to the lowest-common Satanic denominator. In practice during 1919, he immediately set plans in motion to de-Christianize Hungary with a program of “non-judgmental tolerance.” He reasoned that if Christian sexual ethics could be undermined among children, then both the hated patriarchal family and the church would be dealt a crippling blow.

To achieve his objective, Lukács launched a radical sex education program in the schools. Sex lectures were organized and literature handed out that graphically instructed youth in free love (promiscuity) and sexual intercourse, while simultaneously encouraging them to deride and reject Christian moral ethics, monogamy and parental and church authority. All of this was accompanied by a reign of cultural terror perpetrated against parents, priests and dissenters.
https://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-74512-post-2045621.html#pid2045621


Porn and the nihilistic culture it spawned is the main vehicle for the decline of Christianity in the West. "Teenage rebellion" and "arrested development" are kind of embodied in your avatar, and in the "rock star wild side" that you refer to, which was part of the new church of the counterculture that was set up in the 1960s.
 
I hope one thing we can all agree on is that porn is poison. A man with control over his sexual desires is a free man who can't be jerked around or easily influenced.

At a certain level it's not as much about political control as it is about money. TV shows are about a hundred times more sexual now than they were when I was a kid. Maybe it's a globalist conspiracy, more realistically it's just that producers realize that porn sells and people want to watch shows that are basically just porn with better storylines.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
Jacob Rast said:
I hope one thing we can all agree on is that porn is poison. A man with control over his sexual desires is a free man who can't be jerked around or easily influenced.

At a certain level it's not as much about political control as it is about money. TV shows are about a hundred times more sexual now than they were when I was a kid. Maybe it's a globalist conspiracy, more realistically it's just that producers realize that porn sells and people want to watch shows that are basically just porn with better storylines.
Porn moguls are on record saying that their primary driver is to undermine traditional societies.

Money isn't the main driver in many Hollywood projects, like the weak woke efforts (ghostbusters, star wars etc), there is a bigger motive there.
 
911 said:
Jacob Rast said:
I hope one thing we can all agree on is that porn is poison. A man with control over his sexual desires is a free man who can't be jerked around or easily influenced.

At a certain level it's not as much about political control as it is about money. TV shows are about a hundred times more sexual now than they were when I was a kid. Maybe it's a globalist conspiracy, more realistically it's just that producers realize that porn sells and people want to watch shows that are basically just porn with better storylines.
Porn moguls are on record saying that their primary driver is to undermine traditional societies.

Money isn't the main driver in many Hollywood projects, like the weak woke efforts (ghostbusters, star wars etc), there is a bigger motive there.
Any sources on this? It could be true. I'm just a bigger believer in greed and a small-minded gain mentality than I am in grand Machiavellian conspiracies.
 
Whenever we're discussing the Constitution and Amendments, keep in mind that John Adams wrote:

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

Every attempt to twist our principles of liberty into a license for evil is ignorance, revisionism, malice, or some combination of the above.
 
Porn should be banned, prostitution should be allowed and licensed.

There are some who state that porn lowers rape rate - that is frankly not proven. We know that availability of legal affordable prostitution lowers rape and murder by the lowlifes and low-tier men. That has been shown repeatedly.

Porn however - the reverse is true. A country should take into account all aspects when allowing or promoting something.

There is no reason to allow it. And if there is some illegal contraband, then so be it, it would still work well by curbing it to a high degree.
 
^ Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine both agreed that prostitution should be legal, on the grounds that though it's evil, it prevents worse evils in society. Aquinas added to that by saying the purpose of the government wasn't to legislate morality, but to maintain peace and harmony, and he believed that the availability of prostitution would prevent the exact kind of "incel uprisings" that we have seen from time to time (ie, Elliot Rogers and similar). I'm not sure I agree with him on the legislation of morality issue, but he's certainly right about the peace and harmony part: that men unable to attract women wouldn't go on murderous rampages borne of sexual anxiety if they could just go pay a hooker a couple hundred bucks and get it out of their system.

As an unrelated yet relevant note, it would also force women to bring something to the table beyond sex if they want to get a man's commitment. If sex were a commodity officially rather than unofficially, and women knew men could get it anytime they wanted, they'd need to seriously step up their game and go closer to how they used to be. Men wouldn't even have to use the service for this to occur - the mere threat of it, looming in the background, would be enough to kick female effort into overdrive.
 

Dallas Winston

Ostrich
Gold Member
questor70 said:
What bothers me more than the presence of porn is the lack of limits to access adult content in general. The world was a better place when it was difficult for kids to see this stuff. Having it such a free-for-all sends a message, culturally, that it's all equally wholesome. Not just talking about hardcore porn, but violence, swearing, and generally crude/coarse behavior. It was one thing when, let's say, rock stars were living on the wild side back in the 70s and 80s, because we at least had societal norms to compare them to. We knew that kind of thing was "out there". You had normal society in a bubble and the wild side on the other and if you decided to take a walk on the wild side you knew you did so at your own risk. Now hedonism has been normalized and social stigma eliminated.
It's by design. sexual liberation (porn) is a form of political control.

The younger the better as far as GloboHomo is concerned. One addicted to porn is docile and not a threat to them.
 
Top