Comments on: Mandatory condoms for porn shot in Los Angeles County

Mandatory condoms for porn shot in Los Angeles County

Sticherbeast — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 16:47:06 -0800

9th Circuit upholds Los Angeles County law mandating the use of condoms in porn shoots. Decision here. Will this force the porn industry out of Los Angeles?

Kayden Kross, one of the plaintiffs, was previously featured in this Nekrogoblikon video, alongside Jon "Taco from The League" Lajoie.

By: bearwife

bearwife — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 16:55:30 -0800

I am a bit surprised to find myself sympathizing with the overruled claim by plaintiff that this is a first amendment violation of their right to express their message, the depiction of an idealized world of condomless sex. Nor do I think I agree, even using an intermediate scrutiny standard, that this ban has only a "de minimus" -- no pun intended! -- effect on expression of that thought.

By: Thorzdad

Thorzdad — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:07:50 -0800

I could have sworn I heard about some sfx house that was doing post-production condom "removal". That is, using computers to eliminate the condom from the video.

By: el io

el io — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:08:45 -0800

I'm genuinely curious what percentage of porn actors went to LA to find a legitimate acting job and ended in porn out of desperation. And if the porn industry moves (say, to Vegas) that they might be unable to recruit people from this desperation.

By: jeff-o-matic

jeff-o-matic — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:09:40 -0800

Pretty sure they're doing a lot of production in Florida these days. Seriously, why would you need to be in CA for this? Load up a truck with all the technical equipment and drive it to FL.

By: anewnadir

anewnadir — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:09:53 -0800

bearwife: I tend to agree with the Court's rejection of that argument. Saying that the ordinance violates the Plaintiffs' "right to express their message, the depiction of an idealized world of condomless sex" is to assume the conclusion of their argument.

By: el io

el io — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:10:39 -0800

Thorzdad: Imagine honing your digital manipulation skills, imagining yourself one day working at Pixar some large hollywood studio and finding yourself staring at dicks all day, carefully scrubbing condoms off. Because the porn industry needs more sad sad jobs.

By: Dip Flash

Dip Flash — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:20:42 -0800

I don't know anything about the legal intricacies but I have noticed how many articles I've read by women performers saying how physically uncomfortable condoms make porn, given how long and energetic the scenes are. That doesn't make the law automatically illegal, but I wish it had carried more weight when considering the law in the first place. Pretty sure they're doing a lot of production in Florida these days. Seriously, why would you need to be in CA for this? Load up a truck with all the technical equipment and drive it to FL. They will if this makes things uneconomic, but there are huge efficiencies in being in a place full of experienced film crew people.

By: Talez

Talez — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:33:46 -0800

By: GenjiandProust

GenjiandProust — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:42:50 -0800

Next on SFXXX: motion capture suits like you've never seen them before!

By: Nevin

Nevin — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 17:43:54 -0800

I could have sworn I heard about some sfx house that was doing post-production condom "removal". That is, using computers to eliminate the condom from the video. That's not really the issue. The condoms make shoots very uncomfortable for women. I think one of the reasons why the industry is concentrated in LA is because the industry is concentrated in LA, if that makes sense. LA is where the capital is that is needed for production, the infrastructure including cameras and other gear, as well as locations (cheesy McMansions overlooking the Valley), the talent agents, and the concentration of talent itself. It's not an easy thing to pick up and move everything to Florida (although Florida, with its own home-grown sleazy online marketing industry seems like the perfect place).

By: nadawi

nadawi — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 18:01:12 -0800

it's not just an issue of comfort for the women, it's an issue of health. because of all the stopping and starting, lubrication issues, and sheer athleticism of porn sex, condoms cause more abrasions and makes it easier for them to contract stds and just normal infections. this law is harmful.

By: Freedomboy

Freedomboy — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 18:22:55 -0800

So there has to be a condom wrangler on set?

By: Sticherbeast

Sticherbeast — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 18:32:01 -0800

Because one of the 7 billion people in the world could never be proud of doing that. Yes, this. Merely by dint of having gone to university in a big city, I have wound up making a number of friends in various related fields. As a class, they are no more or less neurotic than anybody else I have had the pleasure of meeting. They have no more reason to be embarrassed with their lives than anybody else who has ever existed. IMNSHO, this ruling comes from a place of assuming that these people are worthless and that their jobs are worthless. It does not matter that this condom law does not concretely help anything, or that work in porn is many, many times safer than just about any other occupation which involves manual labor. People assume that porn stars are dirty and stupid, even though as a class they are many times more assiduous than anyone you have ever met, let alone the average graduate of a high school abstinence program. And yet, these are the patronizing and harmful laws they get. I also think the 9th Circuit's First Amendment arguments are baloney. Condom use in porn cannot be reasonably compared to G-strings in stripping. That's even before we roll in the actual issues of comfort and safety. Bleh bleh bleh bleh. ... What is a condom anyway? a miserable pile of lambskin

By: oceanjesse

oceanjesse — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 18:42:32 -0800

Big Condom at work again I see.

By: kanewai

kanewai — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 18:44:55 -0800

These are the same guys (Weinstein et al.) who have been so vocal about opposing PrEP and generic viagra. I'm not a fan. I'm genuinely curious what percentage of porn actors went to LA to find a legitimate acting job and ended in porn out of desperation. I don't know a thing about straight porn, but none of the gay guys I know were aiming to be "legitimate" actors. They did it for fun, for the experience, for a better paycheck than tending bar and waiting tables, for the glory and fame (the joke was, all you have to do is one film and you are a "porn star" for life), and occasionally to give their escort (or 'massage') careers a boost. I've heard second-hand stories about guys whose drug addictions led them to porn - but no stories about failed actors ending up doing porn (not that this means they don't exist, of course).

By: octobersurprise

octobersurprise — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 18:51:46 -0800

imagining yourself one day working at Pixar some large hollywood studio and finding yourself staring at dicks all day, carefully scrubbing condoms off You can imagine what happens next.

By: azpenguin

azpenguin — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 19:07:53 -0800

So, all of those states that were claiming they wanted the companies tired of California's regulations must be eager to get this industry and the jobs in their states, right? Right, Arizona? Right, Texas? Right, Kansas? I'll be waiting for Rick Perry's news conference begging the porn industry to set up shop in Texas.

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 19:18:55 -0800

"it's not just an issue of comfort for the women, it's an issue of health. because of all the stopping and starting, lubrication issues, and sheer athleticism of porn sex, condoms cause more abrasions and makes it easier for them to contract stds and just normal infections. this law is harmful." Yup. And Weinstein et al. were behind the lawsuit that shuttered AIM, the big AIDS testing outfit for the porn industry. Weinstein has made porn less safe. He's also someone who calls PrEP a "party drug." Pretty much everyone in AIDS/HIV work cringes when he opens his mouth, and there's hope that he'll have to step down soon over this. It was also disappointing to see just how incompetent the Free Speech Coalition is. They did a shit job of opposing AHF on the condoms law, and they were the advocacy group that could have made the biggest difference. Instead, they fucked around and couldn't hire anyone competent to manage the campaign and got slaughtered by reactionary Angelenos (people forget that Prop. 8 passed in LA County). So this ends up being one of those laws that's constitutional but dumb, and the courts can't save us from every idiot initiative that the people back. They're there to ensure lawful governance, not wise governance.

By: Dip Flash

Dip Flash — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 19:23:53 -0800

work in porn is many, many times safer than just about any other occupation which involves manual labor. I spend part of every year on excavation and construction sites, with bulldozers and off-road dump trucks and other big equipment, plus the usual assortment of chainsaws and other smaller tools. I'd put serious money on unprotected sex with porn stars as being far, far safer.

By: jb

jb — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 19:24:09 -0800

Not having athletic, start & stop, hours long sex, I didn't realise that there were problems for female performers with pain and tearing. But there are still two good reasons that I can think of to keep condoms in porn (but make them better and safer for the performers): - HIV has been transmitted in professional porn (and female performers are at higher risk) - condomless porn shapes our libidos to expect condomless sex with casual partners, which is itself unsafe. We want condoms to be part of our erotic culture. The gay industry has been using condoms for years, and condomless porn remains very controversial. Wearing and tears are an issue for men as well: how do they handle it?

By: jb

jb — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 19:27:00 -0800

I'd actually forgotten about PrEP - which wasn't a factor when I was learned about these issues (documentary on porn industry, including an HIV breakout). It changes things a lot, though HIV isn't the only STD.

By: Justinian

Justinian — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 19:31:45 -0800

HIV has been transmitted in professional porn (and female performers are at higher risk) I could come up with a thousand laws which would make various professions safer (and that's even granting requiring condoms in Los Angeles does anything to make porn safer in the first place). None of those laws have a chance in hell of being passed. This law is absolutely nothing but moralizing under the pretense of caring about safety.

By: zippy

zippy — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 19:32:30 -0800

imagining yourself one day working at Pixar some large hollywood studio and finding yourself staring at dicks all day, carefully scrubbing condoms off You can imagine what happens next A featurette titled "Fuxo, Jr?"

By: furtive

furtive — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 19:47:29 -0800

You've Got a Friend in Me

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 19:52:24 -0800

"HIV has been transmitted in professional porn (and female performers are at higher risk)" The safest way to prevent transmission is by requiring regular testing prior to shoots. The porn industry has a much lower incidence of HIV+ status and transmission than the general public. "condomless porn shapes our libidos to expect condomless sex with casual partners, which is itself unsafe. We want condoms to be part of our erotic culture. " That's not an argument for a law; that was specifically what this lawsuit addressed. Drawing a causal arrow from bareback porn to bareback sex is incredibly problematic and focusing on that line is deleterious to other public health interventions.

By: the lake is above, the water below

the lake is above, the water below — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 20:36:11 -0800

Condomless gay porn is still controversial??? I'm hardly a connoisseur of exotic, freaky or otherwise non-mainstream porn and I all I see is condomless porn. I think a lot has changed since the late 90s (thank god). I wonder if the folks (who backed this) who are concerned about the spread of communicable diseases are also gung-ho about needle exchanges, safe shooting sites, etc. I bet not.

By: Sophie1

Sophie1 — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 20:38:57 -0800

Michael Weinstein is a moralizing attention whore who spends millions of dollars getting his photo in the paper and his name in print that was donated by people who honestly believe they are helping those living with HIV. He is not only the mouth behind this law and the anti-PrEP bullshit, but he had a float in the Rose Parade the last 2 years and he has sued the L.A. County Department of Health, division of AIDS, wanting his own separate department of public health, eating both donor and tax payer money. And that's just the beginning. I'm looking forward to the day that someone gets the cojones to ride him out of the industry on a rail.

By: xchmp

xchmp — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 20:39:07 -0800

condomless porn shapes our libidos to expect condomless sex with casual partners, which is itself unsafe Comic books make us believe that we can pop giant metal claws from our forearms without needing serious hospital treatment afterwards, which is itself unsafe. The rock and roll music teaches our youth to gyrate their hips in a manner sure to cause pelvic distress, which is itself unsafe. The dangerous fantasies of the steam locomotive men condition our bodies to expect all travel to take place at speeds far in excess of that a galloping horse, which is itself unsafe. Pictures that less-browed not-us make on rock in cave-home make need-sex-feeling want women soon-birthing all-clay. Then when thirst-need must walk to water near trees the no-speak-voice and not-seeing-look make us with open eyes but now blind-think not see big-teeth cat-beast that ate kin. Which. Is. Itself. Unsafe.

By: jb

jb — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 20:48:12 -0800

I wonder if the folks (who backed this) who are concerned about the spread of communicable diseases are also gung-ho about needle exchanges, safe shooting sites, etc. I bet not. I am. As for condomless gay porn being controversial: it was earlier this summer when the local LGBT newspaper/website ran an article & video on one studio allowing bareback for the first time.

By: DevilsAdvocate

DevilsAdvocate — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 21:04:48 -0800

Am I missing something? Looking at the decision itself (2nd link in the FPP), it seems to me that the Circuit Court has only upheld the District Court's decision not to issue a preliminary injunction against the condom requirement (they did issue a preliminary injunction against other aspects of the law). The District Court has not yet ruled on the case itself, let alone the Circuit Court, and — unless I'm grossly misunderstanding the decision — the first linked article is terribly misreporting the legal situation.

By: Jacqueline

Jacqueline — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 21:29:25 -0800

And if the porn industry moves (say, to Vegas) that they might be unable to recruit people from this desperation. Oh, there are plenty of desperate people in Vegas as well. When I lived there, there were several "Make $500 Tonight!" billboards around town recruiting for a local porn production company.

By: Joakim Ziegler

Joakim Ziegler — Tue, 16 Dec 2014 22:52:57 -0800

octobersurprise: "imagining yourself one day working at Pixar some large hollywood studio and finding yourself staring at dicks all day, carefully scrubbing condoms off You can imagine what happens next." Big Hero 6?

By: fairmettle

fairmettle — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 03:23:20 -0800

Big Condom at work again I see. That's what he said.

By: jpe

jpe — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 04:20:12 -0800

@ devilsadvocate: it's common for most of the legal issues to get hashed out in pretrial stages (like here, an appeal from a denial of a motion for a preliminary injunction). When an appeals court rules that a party is unlikely to prevail on a given legal issue, that's very often the last word on that issue.

By: Metafilter Username

Metafilter Username — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 04:39:11 -0800

imagining yourself one day working at Pixar some large hollywood studio and finding yourself staring at dicks all day, carefully scrubbing condoms off You can imagine what happens next Toy Story?

By: DevilsAdvocate

DevilsAdvocate — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 04:43:38 -0800

Ah, thanks jpe.

By: dr_dank

dr_dank — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 06:53:05 -0800

jb: condomless porn shapes our libidos to expect condomless sex with casual partners, which is itself unsafe. We want condoms to be part of our erotic culture. Instead of taking the piss, I'm going to back you up on this point. Lets not forget the sorry state of sex education in most places in the US. Where are young people learning the most about sex? Hint: it isn't the bowdlerized "Jesus will give you AIDS if you think about dicks" farce that passes for sex ed in many places, its porn. It doesn't have to be a public service announcement, just modeling the behavior.

By: nadawi

nadawi — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 07:12:57 -0800

...or we could be spending these efforts and money to better sex education.

By: Sangermaine

Sangermaine — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 07:15:57 -0800

It doesn't have to be a public service announcement, just modeling the behavior. Exactly. It's like how the GTA games have resulted in a wave of violent crime and property destruction that plagues our cities to this day.

By: LindsayIrene

LindsayIrene — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 08:09:31 -0800

If it wasn't for porn, there likely wouldn't be a wide-spread expectation for women to have their pubic hair yanked out, so the argument can be made that porn shapes expectations. But, yeah, having better sex ed seems like a better way to go. Good sex ed would emphasize that the sex that most people actually have isn't much like the sex depicted in porn, and that the body parts that are depicted tend to fit into a narrow range of normal. Kids know that a video game isn't reality, but they don't all have the sophistication to understand that porn, even though it has real people having actual sex, is not depicting sex in a realistic manner.

By: Greg Nog

Greg Nog — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 08:22:39 -0800

We want condoms to be part of our erotic culture. This seems like a fairly quixotic goal.

By: amorphatist

amorphatist — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 08:34:38 -0800

We want condoms to be part of our erotic culture. Who is this "we" you speak of? Hurry up and cure all the STDs so that future generations won't have to suffer the rottenness of condoms.

By: kgasmart

kgasmart — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 09:28:26 -0800

Comic books make us believe that we can pop giant metal claws from our forearms without needing serious hospital treatment afterwards, which is itself unsafe. The rock and roll music teaches our youth to gyrate their hips in a manner sure to cause pelvic distress, which is itself unsafe. Is this an argument that porn doesn't shape and influence people's sexual beliefs, expectations and behavior?

By: Sangermaine

Sangermaine — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 09:31:44 -0800

If it wasn't for porn, there likely wouldn't be a wide-spread expectation for women to have their pubic hair yanked out, so the argument can be made that porn shapes expectations. LindsayIrene You can't just say that. Is that actually true? Do you have some evidence that the change expectations regarding pubic hair due to pornography? Is this an argument that porn doesn't shape and influence people's sexual beliefs, expectations and behavior? kgasmart The people making the argument that porn does "shape and influence people's sexual beliefs, expectations and behavior" should be the ones offering up evidence, because it does sound like all the "common sense" claims that violent video games/movies cause people to be violent. Stuff like this: Kids know that a video game isn't reality, but they don't all have the sophistication to understand that porn, even though it has real people having actual sex, is not depicting sex in a realistic manner. Is there proof this is happening? Not just "Of course, it's obvious!" responses, but actual evidence that kids can't separate porn from reality the way they do with games.

By: feckless fecal fear mongering

feckless fecal fear mongering — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 09:41:10 -0800

The gay industry has been using condoms for years, and condomless porn remains very controversial. It's not mainstream controversial. It's controversial in isolated pockets. Hell, Bel Ami--a major studio for those not familiar with naked men on their screens--was staunchly 'always condoms for fucking always' until recen years. Bareback porn is more popular and makes more money. Multiple studios specialize in it, and they don't seem to be hurting for cash at all. These are the same guys (Weinstein et al.) who have been so vocal about opposing PrEP Fuck this guy right in the nose. PrEP seems, so far, to be a Godsend.

By: kgasmart

kgasmart — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 09:49:52 -0800

There's quite a bit of research on whether and how porn shapes and influences sexual behavior: Last year, American GQ's sex columnist, Siobhan Rosen, complained about the "pornified sex" men seemed to expect – not in a relationship, when trust has been established, but from the very first encounter. She wrote about men she had just started seeing who brandished ball gags, ejaculated on to her body and used really nasty language during sex. "You don't want to do those things with someone you hardly know," she tells me. Men recreating the money shot is something that "has happened to every single one of my girlfriends," she says. The advertising executive, Cindy Gallop, became so irritated by this very thing that she made it the central complaint of her TED talk when launching her website, makelovenotporn.com, in 2009.

By: Kutsuwamushi

Kutsuwamushi — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 09:52:56 -0800

It doesn't have to be a public service announcement, just modeling the behavior. I agree entirely that media has an influence on our behavior. If you say this, it seems like there will always be a strawman brought up in response, such as oh yeah, that's why everyone who bought GTA went on to rob a bank. But I think most of us believe that there is at least a subtle influence in some cases--because otherwise there would be far less reason to be concerned about negative portrayals of minorities, for example. And the research into media influences on us has not borne out the idea that there is no influence ever--that when we turn off the movie or game or tv, we are completely unaffected. It's complicated; there are null results sometimes, and I have definitely seen taken up on gaming forums as a vindication of -- I don't know, the hobby everyone has, that apparently can't be approached critically? Anyway, that's long-winded. I don't think this is a good reason to require condom usage. First, if we're talking about regulating porn to shape people's perceptions of what sexual encounters are like, I think there are far more pressing concerns than whether or not the actors are using condoms. The rampant misogyny, for example. The stuff that normalizes violence against, and degradation of, women. If we're not regulating that--and I don't think we could without consequences for free speech that would be far reaching and undesirable--then regulating whether or not you use condoms based on that reasoning seems ... really myopic. And then there is the fact that there are real concerns about the female performers' health and comfort for regulating condom usage. We are going to try to promote condom usage in a way that harms female performers? I'm not okay with that. That's placing a vague, subtle benefit (if it exists at all) over their real concerns. They're people too -- even though some probably think they are lesser people because of what they do.

By: Gelatin

Gelatin — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 10:05:02 -0800

MetaFilter: staring at dicks all day, carefully scrubbing condoms off

By: xchmp

xchmp — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 14:09:30 -0800

Is this an argument that porn doesn't shape and influence people's sexual beliefs, expectations and behavior? No. It's an argument that people have always couched their moral outrage in an ostensible concern for other people's heath and wellbeing. It's presumably a lot easier to justify (to yourself and others) a paternalistic desire to regulate the lives and choices of other people if it's because of deep concern and not because their behaviour makes you feel uncomfortable, scared or offended. It's usually quite transparent because people who are genuinely concerned rarely promote censorship or criminalisation, while those who genuinely care about other people usually start from a position of respect, recognising the agency of the people they work with and the legitimacy of their choices, providing information and tools that empower rather than dismiss. History is littered with the consequences of moral outrage cloaked in public health panics. Arresting sex workers for their own good and making it impossible for them to work in relative safety is a current example (which helps neither the people who vociferously reject the 'help' on offer, nor those who have genuinely been the victims of exploitation). The same thing is at work when women (who are more frequently, but not exclusively the target of this kind of faux-health social enforcement) are forced to undertake medially worthless and degrading'treatment' in order to access abortion services. On different lines, when loud and angry music is targetted by self-appointed moral arbiters it's always linked to suicide in spite of the lack of any evidence that could support this. The actual target is pretty much interchangeable because the arguments are always the same. Dungeouns & Dragons. Video Nasty. Trenchcoat Mafia. Reefer Madness. Everything influence's people's beliefs, expectations and behaviour. That is essentially the definition of being conscious. I'm not expressing any opionin on the public health effects of condoms in pornography or because I think that line of reasoning is bankrupt and engaging with it legitimises ultimately authoritarian ideas. No public health goal will justify a worldview that refuses to acknowledge that people, even those who engage in higher-risk activities that others may well consider stupid and harmful, can legitimately hold different ideas of what risks are worth taking and do not need to be shown the light by their moral superiors.

By: misha

misha — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 19:21:22 -0800

By women having all their pubic hair ripped out, you mean waxing, right? There's a pretty interesting history, actually, that points more to the fashion industry pushing pubic hair removal. Women shaving off bodily hair became more popular after Gillette actively marketed a razor to women and hinted this kind of grooming was a thing they should do. And then pubic hair removal in general became more of a thing after the introduction of the bikini in the late forties. A 2008 Australian study showed that reading fashion magazines and watching reality TV is also correlated with pubic hair removal. (source) In general, expectations on women come more from the fashion industry than porn. Which makes sense since women are inundated with sleek, air-brushed models marketing to them in fashion magazines from an early age, while mainstream porn is generally geared to appeal more to het or gay men. Which doesn't mean porn has no influence at all, of course. And porn also reflects popular trends, too. I do remember an interviewer doing a feature with Linda Lovelace (of Deep Throat infamy*) asking her why she shaved everything off, and Linda just shrugged and said something like the bare look was the popular thing in the Texas swingers' scene at the time. I am really thankful for this thread, by the way, for educating me more on the condom issue. For someone not familiar with all the background, asking porn actors to wear condoms seems like a sensible choice, even a responsible action for the prevention of spreading STDs, etc. But now, reading about this, and thinking about all the stopping and changing positions and acrobatics in porn shoots, yeah, of course it would get really uncomfortable for the women in these films, ouch! * Deep Throat has a pretty ugly history. The movie achieved cult classic status, and then LL came forward to say that she had been coerced into sexual acts, beaten and abused during its production.

By: klangklangston

klangklangston — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 19:46:47 -0800

"If it wasn't for porn, there likely wouldn't be a wide-spread expectation for women to have their pubic hair yanked out, so the argument can be made that porn shapes expectations. " I suppose it depends on how broadly you want to draw the category "porn," as Ancient Egyptians considered pubic hair barbaric and removed it. And today I found out that AHF is gonna try to get this passed as a statewide law this year even as we're working with some other folks on HIV decriminalization. Whee.

By: Dip Flash

Dip Flash — Wed, 17 Dec 2014 21:32:32 -0800

uppose it depends on how broadly you want to draw the category "porn," as Ancient Egyptians considered pubic hair barbaric and removed it. Exactly. Body hair fashions have come and gone over time, as has the availability of sexualized imagery. I'm sure they track together in some fashion, but I'd be less than certain that the hair in the images are the cause of changes in pubic hair fashions, rather than the other way around. We want condoms to be part of our erotic culture. That ship has sailed and the condoms are not on board. I can remember the very well-intentioned attempts to eroticize condoms in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and I think we can agree that it hasn't exactly taken off. "A necessary evil" is about as positive as most people will go on that front. She wrote about men she had just started seeing who brandished ball gags, ejaculated on to her body and used really nasty language during sex. I don't know about ball gags, but I can remember female friends in college complaining about the second two items, and at that point online porn meant using a BBS and being very patient while a low-res photo of unknown smuttiness appeared line by line. I will believe things have gotten (for lack of a better word) pornier, but the causality is not as simple as seems to be posited here.

By: nadawi

nadawi — Thu, 18 Dec 2014 07:14:30 -0800

my shaving habits were policed by other women, not men with porn on the brain - first it was the older ladies tsktsk'ing my leg hair ( i was 10) and then it was noticing that no other girl at the pool that i could see was trying to tuck hairs into the side of their bathing suit - that's when i started shaving my bikini area regularly. i started shaving myself bare [tw] not in relation to porn but rather in relation to rape, i felt like his smells and cells were existing in my hair and i had to get them off of me (i also cut over 12 inches of hair from my head at this time). the only shaving message i got from porn was actually about leaving more of it - there are a few porn stars through the years that leave the bush on the top, but shave the, uh, undercarriage, which i've found to be the best of both worlds. She wrote about men she had just started seeing who brandished ball gags, ejaculated on to her body and used really nasty language during sex. "You don't want to do those things with someone you hardly know," she tells me. well, she might not want to - but some of us do. and if she wants to blame the money shot on media she'll have to go all the way back to at least the marquis de sade to register that complaint.