Trophy Wives 2 - review by Captain Jack| Author | Post |
|---|---|
Gore Gore Girl  Doctor of the Erotic Arts  7238 Posts 1/09 |  Posted - Sep 30 2016 : 12:06PMInteresting article about avoiding reductive, racist, sexist, and homophobic vocabulary from porn tagging: Can These Pornographers End MILFs, Teens, and Thugs?  [Link] |
| Mister Fahrenheit All-Star Member Meh 4655 Posts 10/13 | Posted - Sep 30 2016 : 12:57PM All in all, I'm more in line with what Nina Hartley says at the end of the article:Crafting the appropriate labels is all well and good, but the concrete conditions that performers face day to day are a bigger concern for me. Unfortunately with the recent implosion of IEAU, it might be a while before we have a vehicle to address those issues.  [Link] |
| Quorrl Senior Member 2835 Posts 3/11 | Posted - Sep 30 2016 : 4:52PM +1 [Link] |
| LPee23 All-Star Member Better to be pissed on, than to be pissed off. 248 Posts 1/15 | Posted - Sep 30 2016 : 6:41PM I would keep the ethnic categories though, since few would say it is necessary to be 100% color blind in order to be culturally sensitive. [Link] |
| misspornUSA Senior Member I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13 | Posted - Sep 30 2016 : 7:32PM Natasha regards the following terms as racist, sexist, etc. and considers them to be offensive: "big black, Asian teen, thug, schoolgirl, MILF, shemale, and so on", but among those the only term I'd jettison is "shemale." So if I ran a site the other categories would remain in place. Thing is, I think that Natasha would not want me to use any labels that offend her, regardless of how I feel about them. Edited by - misspornUSA on 9/30/2016 7:36:19 PM [Link] |
| whatsatelephonebill Senior Member 2935 Posts 10/11 | Posted - Sep 30 2016 : 7:51PM And as an aside, I'm not sure how I feel about holding up Joanna Angel as someone who is against that type of labeling, seeing as she has never really shied away from using it (especially when it comes to race), and has done some pretty iffy things herself (with the most egregious example being the "Yellowface" in her Walking Dead parody). [Link] |
| ninja1 Senior Member 2939 Posts 1/08 | Posted - Oct 1 2016 : 5:51PM [Link] |
| aclayfan All-Star Member 5060 Posts 8/11 | Posted - Oct 2 2016 : 2:26AM Edited by - aclayfan on 10/2/2016 2:29:13 AM [Link] |
| Hardware All-Star Member Your other left 14595 Posts 3/02 | Posted - Oct 2 2016 : 9:11AM [Link] |
| cormac Senior Member 1093 Posts 1/14 | Posted - Oct 3 2016 : 6:52AM |
| LPee23 All-Star Member Better to be pissed on, than to be pissed off. 248 Posts 1/15 | Posted - Oct 3 2016 : 10:41AM |
| misspornUSA Senior Member I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13 | Posted - Oct 3 2016 : 11:00AM I don't agree that "titles about 'Da Hood', 'Jungle', 'Ghetto', or 'Gangsta'" are "most definitely racist." Besides the fact that those titles may actually be descriptive of the roleplay scenarios in a porn movie or scene, the purpose of the titles is meant to attract the interest of IR consumers. Consider two possible titles of the same scene: "Young Woman Fucked in an Urban Environment" and "White Girl Fucked in Da Hood." Which title do you think would result in a more commercially successful scene? Frankly, to say that the latter title should not be used is to say that sexual fantasies that are not socially progressive should be ignored by the industry, a notion that I deeply disagree with. Edited by - misspornUSA on 10/3/2016 11:01:11 AM [Link] |
| misspornUSA Senior Member I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13 | Posted - Oct 3 2016 : 11:06AM [Link] |
| chessmaster Member 768 Posts 6/12 | Posted - Oct 3 2016 : 11:12AM [Link] |
| cormac Senior Member 1093 Posts 1/14 | Posted - Oct 3 2016 : 11:16AM [Link] |
| misspornUSA Senior Member I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13 | Posted - Oct 3 2016 : 12:37PM [Link] |
| misspornUSA Senior Member I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13 | Posted - Oct 3 2016 : 12:51PM [Link] |
| cormac Senior Member 1093 Posts 1/14 | Posted - Oct 3 2016 : 1:04PM [Link] |
| LPee23 All-Star Member Better to be pissed on, than to be pissed off. 248 Posts 1/15 | Posted - Oct 3 2016 : 1:24PM At the same time, I admire what Stoya is doing with her project. She is not forcing her system of tags on anyone. She may actually create a really nice system that some others may want to emulate. Honestly, I don't know what it would take for other companies to adopt her system as she would hope, but at least it may get people thinking about better tags. [Link] |
| misspornUSA Senior Member I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13 | Posted - Oct 3 2016 : 1:45PM [Link] |
| Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12 | Posted - Oct 3 2016 : 6:40PM [Link] |
| cormac Senior Member 1093 Posts 1/14 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 6:28AM Freedom of speech isn't absolute; not in my country and I assume not in the USA. It's limited by necessary legal restriction and if the American legal system has imposed a blanket exception for porn then I'd like to see the eveidence. Otherwise it is subject to the same limitations as any other form of media. [Link] |
| chessmaster Member 768 Posts 6/12 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 8:42AM [Link] |
| cormac Senior Member 1093 Posts 1/14 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 8:48AM Edited by - cormac on 10/4/2016 9:43:09 AM [Link] |
| whatsatelephonebill Senior Member 2935 Posts 10/11 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 9:54AM Unless you're talking about how scenes are titled on tube sites, in which case there's really nothing you can do. And as to the legal argument, yes, products made for entertainment do get the freedom to label themselves whatever they want for the most part without legal consequence. [Link] |
 | |
| misspornUSA Senior Member I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 10:21AM [Link] |
| misspornUSA Senior Member I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 10:28AM Edited by - misspornUSA on 10/4/2016 10:28:42 AM [Link] |
| cormac Senior Member 1093 Posts 1/14 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 11:30AM Let's use an extreme example: people have rape fantasies and porn caters for them. Forget for a mement that to put such a fantasy into practice is a crime, the fantasy itself is not. But would it be acceptable to have a genre on a search that says 'rape' or a title that says 'Rape that Bitch'? It's not an exact analogy with what I'm saying but maybe it illustrates the point. That's the question I'm asking. Why are racist/discriminatory tagging/titles acceptable when it's not necessary and shouldn't be acceptable in a modern society? I'm not trying to ban peoples' fantasies. [Link] |
| misspornUSA Senior Member I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 12:15PM Edited by - misspornUSA on 10/4/2016 12:28:48 PM Edited by - misspornUSA on 10/4/2016 12:29:52 PM [Link] |
| cormac Senior Member 1093 Posts 1/14 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 1:06PM Over and out. [Link] |
| misspornUSA Senior Member I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 1:27PM I won't bother adding anything else to my reply since you've concluded your side of the conversation. [Link] |
| Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 9:00PM But can any tag actually convey a complete though such as "____ is superior to ____"? Just how the hell is "interracial" a racist term? I thought the idea of racism was discriminatory? Wouldn't interracial seem diametrically opposed to this by definition? This is when the busybodies end up eating their own logic and undermining their own purported goals. Interracial is a fine thing, especially for anyone who would like to oppose racism. Imagine all races mixing to the point everyone is some kind of mulatto. Kinda hard to discriminate based on race when everyone is mixed and increasingly impossible to tell apart. How the hell is "big black" racist? Black females generally do have the largest posteriors. A lot of people like them. Black men by and large naturally appreciate them not least of all. So what's wrong with helping people find more easily what they like? Just because there are no absolutes, and in fact there are no shortage of exceptions to any rules so generalized as to be applied to populations numbering in the billions of people does not mean suddenly we can't enjoy these traits in general. Generally speaking, Asians are smaller statured. A lot of people also appreciate this. So what's wrong with having a "little Asian" tag? What bothers me about this arcane moral indignation is that it not merely confers but insists some form of offense be not only taken but delivered. But there's no end to this. All this leads to is anyone taking offense to anything at any time for any reasons. That's the end game. No one wants to live in that world, I assure you, save for the mentally ill and they need help. They are called social justice warriors. All this strikes me as fake outrage in search of a cause, much like the myth of sexism in porn. Only on a very superficial level to the kneejerk crowd of perpetually offended SJW's could the porn industry be maligned as misogynistic anymore. But it all falls apart under just a moderate level of scrutiny. Some people like cheating scenarios. Others don't. I can certainly imagine why some people would even be "triggered" by such themes - specifically those who have been cheated on and deeply hurt by it. But does this mean now we have to censor the tag "cheating"? If there's at least one good idea to be found in that article it is perhaps that Stoya's Trenchcoat site allows members to filter out those tags which displease them. This is a fine idea I can't imagine anyone objecting to. But it's fine not because it imposes actual limitations on anyone else from an authoritarian/administrative capacity. It is actually the libertarian thing to give the users more options. Letting people filter out what may not happen to suit their sensibilities is an expansion of ability, not a limitation. And the extra liberty of this is precisely why they shouldn't be so fussy with the tags. The model provided by "the big bad mega-corporations" is actually the most liberating. Allowing users to provide their own tags means every scene could plausibly have hundreds of tags, maybe thousands. The more, the better. This is the very nature of search engines. It provides more information. More information leads us closer to the truth - the whole truth. And as Steven Pinker has asserted, the truth cannot be sexist. But by God, is this really where we are at now? Offended by tags? Offended by the words MILF and Teen? Look, I can understand why such terms can pose foibles in a search function, or even technically unhelpful. But offensive? Stoya's great grievance: Some scenes tag me as both MILF AND Teen! OMG! Listen snowflakes: a MILF is by definition a "mom I'd like to fuck." A mom is any woman who has given birth. Teens can sometimes be moms. Therefore it stands to reason that Teens can in fact be MILFs. The only problem is not for the desirable and highly demanded females who benefit tremendously from this kind of attention, but for the users searching for something more specific which these tags are insufficient in finding. Generally speaking, the terms MILF and "teen" generally connote some kind of distinct age difference. Most people think of MILFs as being 30 somethings or older. Then they "graduate" to cougars (I guess?) then I suppose next comes "matures" and then GILFs (shudder). But technically there's a lot of potential for overlap here, and very little actual exclusivity in most of these terms. At any rate, these terms all exist primarily (as in at least 95% of the time) because people LIKE and ENJOY such traits or categories. Why must people inject negativity into this? I guarantee you 95% of the time people are using tags it is to find that which they enjoy - not to screen out that which they despise, and much less to target something they hate. If it was the other way around, and such terms were used to discriminate against others - for example of the term "interracial" was used 95% of the time by people as a way of filtering out, which is to say discriminating against, interracial scenes - then okay, I can see the problem. But it's not. It simply is not the case. These terms are used virtually exclusively to facilitate positive searches. That's literally why they have a + sign next to categories, so that it includes things people like. Only the most jaded and impossible to please type of person is searching for what they want by first tagging a bunch of categories they dislike. Like, who is that person whose stream of consciousness goes like "Welp, gonna click on 'blondes' not cuz I can't stand those blondes. Now time to click 'mature' cuz I don't like any woman older than me. Now time to click 'fake breasts' because I cannot stand anything but natural. Oops! Note to self: don't forget to click 'interracial' cuz I'm not about to support miscegenation. Gotta discriminate" ? Really? If such people are spending more time clicking tags to filter out what they dislike - you know what? God bless them. I mean good luck to them as well in finding anything that ever suits them. But for the 99.9% of people, I'm pretty sure we almost all use tags to filter for things we enjoy. These grandstanding celebs are trying to have it both ways. They want to be appreciated for so many different reasons, not just the same single aspect of their being. Yet they want to also stop people from being able to increase the reasons they may appreciate them? What? More tags > less tags. Anyone saying otherwise is only trying to impose their authoritarian purview on others by limiting liberties. [Link] |
| Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 9:11PM These dizzy dames be trippin, I tells ya! How the hell is rape hunky dory, but interracial is "offensive"? Look I'm not here to piss on anyone's rape parades, alright? BUT if someone is assuming an authoritarian role and become the arbiter of what is acceptable and what is not, how exactly does this calculus work out, hm? I'm not about to support the movement to ban tags. This is an utmost trifling and even hypocritical cause. However, if I WAS forced to pare down the taxonomy, surely non-consenting would be among the most expendable tags. I mean just how many rape scenes is Stoya producing over there are Trenchcoat? Just how useful is the non-consent tag anyway? Or wait, I forgot. Utility is not even their concern. It's morals... like, uh, forced sex... Wait didn't Stoya crucify her ex-husband for this very thing? "MILF" is "problematic" but the rape of that MILF is choice enough to tag, per Stoya. [Link] |
| murdock Member I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV 911 Posts 4/06 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 9:13PM You're cracking me up Melvyn! Tell me another one! [Link] |
| Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 9:19PM Rape isn't the issue. It's what we call rape. All these power-hungry moral authoritarians care about is policing speech. Once you cripple the free exchange of diverse perspectives in the marketplace of ideas, everything else falls. I have much more to say on this, but for now I must take a break before venturing into Von Swine length diatribes. [Link] |
| murdock Member I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV 911 Posts 4/06 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 9:32PM In porn A MILF isn't just a mom I'd like to fuck. It has very specific connotations. In porn Interracial isn't just two people of different races. It has a very specific meaning. (Just ask Keni Styles) Whether or not it is appropriate to use those words in porn is the main point but somehow you managed to sidestep the issue almost entirely and attacked some straw man. If you think the labels don't matter, do you think it would be acceptable to relabel Interracial titles as "N***er/Cr***er" instead? [Link] |
| Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 9:40PM But since you asked, it does get even better: Funnily enough, I remember seeing a talk show where both a white supremacist and a black supremacist ironically became bedfellows of a sort, in that they ideologically agreed both the white and black races should not mix. https://youtu.be/s4k-tTRBOYg https://youtu.be/s4k-tTRBOYg Now do I personally believe that if someone opposes race mixing it necessarily makes them racist... Well, while I oppose that kind of interracially prohibitive social separatism, I still leave the door open to the remote possibility that they could somehow still affirm that no race is superior or inferior. I do believe some people genuinely feel it is for whatever reasons better to preserve their own race not just for their own sake, but out of mutual respect for all races being afforded the same prerogative of self preservation. And sure enough, if you look around the world, you will find notions of racial identity are a common source of esteem. This is not unique to any race. It's justified as pride. I still don't think that's good enough reason to oppose race mixing, but it is something at least approaching neutrality. So of course the question of whether someone may tolerate or tacitly approve of or happen to condemn interracial relationships is not a perfect litmus test, it is still one of the best I can think of in determining someone's honest views at least. [Link] |
| murdock Member I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV 911 Posts 4/06 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 10:05PM But if you want to know why what you said was so hilarious, have a look at nearly any IR-focused thread on these forums and you'll have plenty of people who consciously decide what sexual content they will partake in based on the color of peoples' skin and constantly harp that performers are deciding on what sexual partners they will perform with based on the color of their skin. Basically they're telling other people "I can care about skin color and make decisions based on it, but you can't." To take it a step further, those same people are usually the ones up on their high horse, spouting off about how morally reprehensible it is for some performers to charge more for interracial scenes, while completely ignoring the fact that the only reason those performers can charge more for an interracial scene in the first place is because of the demand they created by consciously choosing to pursue their racialized fetish. That said, I'm all for a free market and don't really care what particular kink someone else is into so long as it can be portrayed by consenting adults, nor do I really care how it is marketed, labeled, or tagged within reason. [Link] |
| Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 10:26PM She's taken it to such an absolute as to prohibit altogether the use of the "interracial" tag - why? Because some of it is offensive sometimes. Guess what? The same can be said of virtually every category. Some teen porn is offensively creepy to me. If I operated a porn site, would I prohibit the teen tag? No. Here's something you gotta realize. No tags I'm defending (which you mock as "poor innocent words") could be nearly as offensive as "N*gger" right? That seems to be the obvious choice you want to exploit for this debate. But you know who loves that word? Shane Diesel. You know who else? Boz. You know who else? Richard Mann. These are just a few examples of black performers and quite popular performers at that, supported by black and white fans. So if some of the time they indulge in "race play" who are we to tell them no, they can't cuz it may be offensive to some? I just don't get this argument. People like to use the word bitch in porn. Most people could at least recognize that there is a sexual connotation to that term. But you know who loves it? Many women do. So why should many women be robbed of their enjoyment of the term because a few are so up in arms about it? If a female performer is very much opposed to the word "bitch" being used, it's certainly her prerogative to communicate her objection to any director that wants to work with her. The same rule applies with black performers and the N-word. No director who wants to make money is going to develop a miserable reputation by pissing off the people they work with. It's not just morally dubious, but it's bad business. It's a lose-lose scenario. What I'm seeing is a representative of one of the most privileged groups in the history of humankind (a beautiful one to boot, which makes her even more privileged) assume the role of the arcane moralist on behalf of the oppressed when her own position ends up marginalizing this same group. But where is she to stand up for actual inequity in porn? I don't hear from her or anyone else for that matter arguing that male performers should make a lot more or that female performers should make a lot less money. I mean, the pay rates are not equal, so this is sexism, right? Please. You'll never hear females in porn make this argument because they stand to lose out in a big way financially if they do. This is why I suspect this "social justice" claptrap is just a guise. For all we know, Stoya sees popular categories as a threat to her own brand or bankability. Maybe she's threatened by "big black asses" because she doesn't have one. You'll have to forgive me, but I just don't trust authoritarians as grandstand for their own personal gain or make power grabs or that result in restrictions running counter to the way things have organically developed. Across the board, the proliferation of tags has been adopted enthusiastically with obvious benefits. Why else would they show up everywhere, on every premium memership site or every tube site or every online retailer or even niche community sites? Don't tell me this is all part of a sinister plan to offend people. It stands to reason offensive tags will not be as popular as inoffensive ones. The market seems to sort this shit out just fine - at least as well as defiant, self-appointed moral authoritarians. Iconoclasts offend people, but they are redeemed with vital social commentary. They will seize on provocative issues or court controversy to raise awareness to serious causes meriting concern. In time what separates the iconoclast from the petty troll whose motive is nothing other than to offend is how they are regarded historically. Trolls don't stand the test of time. In the moment sometimes it is hard to tell the difference, but pay attention close enough or long enough and it shouldn't be too hard to appreciate. The only saving grace I could conjecture at this point is perhaps Stoya herself is only trolling for a cause. Unfortunately to justify a troll's alienating the vast majority of people, not least of whom being the minorities said troll is presumably crusading on behalf of, would require legendary foresight, the like of which would be unprecedented. So at current, color me skeptical. This is the impression I'm getting from it:  Newsflash, folks: the term "interracial" is actually very popular among not just white consumers but black as well. Who'da thunk it, right?[Link] |
| Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 11:03PM By definition "connotation" is less specific, less technical than denotation. So if there's a problem, as I established, with the denotation, then of course there will be problems with the connotation. What is broadly connoted becomes increasingly subjective. Now we're entering the realm of emotional interpretation. What people "feel" it means. I'm not even going to bother explaining what the term "MILF" feels like to me. I will say it would be hilarious to see some pornstar crying over the trauma she experienced when she saw she was labeled a MILF though. And since when did a grown woman fret over being described as younger than she really was? The grief about being labeled as Teen just proves how ridiculous the grievance is. Imagine a spoiled rich female performer making more money than anyone rightly should just by having sex fretting and pouting over being labeled as both MILF and Teen. The horror! How does she manage? As for interracial, there's hardly anything offensive about this category. Do I think it's problematic? Sure in the technical sense. Not the SJW sense, in which problematic is code for "outrageously offensive and must be condemned." Now we're changing gears to where denotation actually matters more than connotation, right? This is an interesting shift. Because technically, or in the denotative sense, interracial should apply to any races mixed, not just black and white. I totally agree that this category in porn is too broad. I would like to see it apply to Asian+Hispanic, or Hispanic+white, or whatever. As it is, it seems to only apply to combination including black. But again, we have to ask, is this because of discrimination AGAINST or discrimination FAVORING black? When you look at SALES it should be quite obvious that the reason we typically see the interracial category to most broadly represent combinations including black is because that's those are the ones which sell the most, overwhelmingly, as opposed to other interracial combinations such as those I would want to include. See? I actually want to include Hispanic+Asian or white+Asian into interracial. I can easily imagine if those categories sold a lot better (and they would have to sell many times better than they actually do to rival black+white interracial, based on all the sales charts I monitor), then they probably would more commonly be included in the interracial category. Where people actually get this issue the MOST twisted is when they claim that interracial in porn only applies to black male + white woman. They use this as "evidence" that it somehow suggests the industry is arbitrarily pushing the "stereotype" of the innocent white female being corrupted by the aggressive black thug (note the conspicuous pandering in the original article). This is in fact FALSE. There are plenty of white male + black female porno titles commonly categorized as interracial as well. What the objectors fail to recognize is that this latter combination simply does not sell nearly as well. Doesn't matter how it's portrayed. Neutrally, or with the female as more innocent or less innocent. They just don't sell as much. So they don't get as much attention. So the SJW's in search of an outrage glom onto the most popular version. Again, it all points to ignoring the majority view, including what black consumers by and large enjoy. Just look at how popular Blacked is among black fans on Twitter. Even Dogfart, which is just about the most racially stereotypical of all the brands in porn history, is highly popular among black fans. If someone out there actually thinks that a more successful version of interracial porn could be made, like a site remotely as popular as either Blacked or Dogfart, catering to Asian men and Hispanic women, by all means PLEASE MAKE IT HAPPEN ALREADY. Until then, it's just a bunch of claptrap spouted from people claiming they know better than all the various companies which have tried various treatments of interracial, from the more classy and progressive, to the neutral, to the dirty and exploitative. I am of a mind that there's a place for all flavors. If one does not suit you, then simply don't support it. Support the kind you like. If you really find one particular brand or another to be a heinous affront to your sensibilities, go boycott it and call on others to join you. Don't be surprised if few do though, because as I said, all these major players in the porn scene like Blacked, Dogfart, DarkX, etc - they all have a lot of black and white fans. I'd dare say more black fans for each of them than opponents in total of all races. The black fans alone would far outweigh all the critics combined. So please, before we waste much more time on this, if you think you got the blueprint for a better mousetrap, why are you withholding it? Is it just so you can sit apart from the crowd of happy and satisfied consumers, and judge them harshly with contempt? I'm not even trying to tell anyone it can't be done. Maybe someone out there does have a better vision for the scene. Maybe Stoya is right and hers is the optimal course. Or maybe someone else out there is the next Greg Lansky and has his or her own vision of something like Blacked, but with Asian males as the primary male talent. And maybe it's even classier than any porn we've ever seen. Maybe it's porn where the male and female talent make the same amount of money, instead of the women making 2 to 5 times as much on average. Maybe it never makes any mention of race or color. Maybe there's never any characters cheating on anyone. Good luck with that! Sincerely, I wish you all the best. [Link] |
| murdock Member I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV 911 Posts 4/06 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 11:29PM Truly a dizzying logic. If Stoya is a Social Justice Warrior, does that make you a Social Justice Worrier? You realize she is literally minding her own business, right? [Link] |
| Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 11:37PM As a black female performer herself, why would she reveal this bias which doesn't necessarily favor herself or those, if we adhere to identity politics, who she must represent? I never doubt her own confidence or esteem. She didn't say it with any shame. She was gleeful about it and good natured. The point is, even those who don't necessarily identify as either partner in the "stereotypical" black male + white female scenarios find enjoyment in them. I always knew lots of white boys loved them some IR porn, but I was more skeptical that aside from them and the cuck crowd and the black males and white females themselves, that perhaps the appeal of such standard IR formula may be a bit more mystifying to others. There's also controversy about this pairing among black females, or at least the media likes to gin this sort of feud up. I've seen many talk shows dedicated to this very relationship dynamic. Many black females along with white males feel especially disturbed by it, feeling like "the other" is "robbing" them of "their men/women". It speaks of deep-seated insecurities. With the guys, it's fear of the big black dick. Imagine that. Another correlation with Stoya's decidedly intolerant opposition to the rather innocuous and vague "big black" tag. But anyway, yeah white boys afraid of BBC supremacy and all that "once you go black" typical stigmatized fear mongering. With black women, they feel in a culture where white women are regarded as the highest standard of beauty, the bm+wf combination leaves them unappreciated too. So I was almost taken aback to hear from Yasmine how much she relished the "innocent white girl taken by the big black man who can give it to her better than any white man could." Apparently she didn't feel feel threatened by it in the least, much less offended by it. She said it like she genuinely gets off to that fantasy. In a weird way, that actually turned me on to Yasmine even more. Maybe it was her confidence? She knew what she likes, and wasn't ashamed to say so. We need more of this honesty, and that only arises when people don't feel shunned by way of a chilling effect on ideas that are generally tread over as if like egg shells. So while the sales demonstrate a good case about the popularity of standard-porn-IR, I think the appeal of this dynamic is even wider than people may even realize. [Link] |
| murdock Member I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV 911 Posts 4/06 | Posted - Oct 4 2016 : 11:43PM If so I'd hope you know that's a terrible and ineffective way of making your point. If not, why continue to bring them up? [Link] |
| Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12 | Posted - Oct 5 2016 : 12:23AM But as the controversial Khalid Muhammad was keen to declare, nothing in this world is equal. As I said, maybe she is right. Maybe her business model turns out to be preferable, even ideal. I strongly doubt it though. But maybe it is best for her as she seeks to carve out her own niche. Maybe there is in fact an untapped reservoir of incentive for her to continue the path of the authoritarian porno librarian. I'm not interested in visiting her library which she no doubt has deliberated on countless sleepless nights to perfectly organize so that it is just so. I mean she's obsessing over tags for fuck's sake. If nothing else, I'll credit her for staying focused to what I'm sure she would call her "craft." I won't deny her that. I actually do believe that porn and art are not mutually exclusive. I do believe some purveyors of porn do indeed produce works of artistic merit. In the meantime, I still feel quite confident that my pushing back against something that smacks of sanctimony and virtue signaling is warranted. I'd dare to say it is apparent still when someone has gone so far off reservation as to basically insult the majority of the industry as well as the consumers. Forgive me, but this is a tad much. The lady doth protest too much, methinks, amirite? I mean, she caters to rape fantasies no? This isn't some hyperbolic impertinent ad hominem I'm throwing out to invalidate all of her concerns. I've heard from many women that this is a common fantasy. In and of itself, I don't hold that against them. I can respect a persons rights to their own fantasies so long as they stay fantasy and don't impinge on anyone else's rights. It simply must be mentioned because it would be easier to respect her views in particular if she afforded others the same level of respect for far less controversial fantasies. When someone goes on to belittle or demean or flat out insult something approaching a simple majority, or certainly a vast majority, of the general population, I gotta stick up for my peoples. And I think I can do so respectfully, or at least I do consider it actually a virtue worth signaling that someone try and show more respect for those views that perturb them when espoused by those who don't have the same decency. Take HRC for example. Why in the fuck did she resort to demonizing "half" of all Republicans as sexist, racist, homophobic, Islamophobic, etc.? How did that help anyone? It certainly didn't help her own cause, as evidenced by the fact the had to apologize shortly after making the sweeping aspersions. Listen, fuck the GOP I says, but I'd also been saying for a long time that the Left ought heed the sage advice to beware when fighting monsters that you do not yourself become one. Maybe it is because HRC believed she's been fighting "them" so long, it was the only way? But I'd like to say that it was merely her "Romney's 47% moment" - if only it wasn't actually worse. [Link] |
| murdock Member I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV 911 Posts 4/06 | Posted - Oct 5 2016 : 12:26AM [Link] |
| Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12 | Posted - Oct 5 2016 : 1:05AM It never ends. The tag policing, to such extremes, only perpetuates this kind of hysteria. Once you start policing tags, good grief. Then someone else wants something else removed. Then another. And so on. It's a slippery slope already exposed with the curious contradiction with the non-consenting exception. "Big black" is offensively problematic because of what it connotes? How does "non-consent" not have darker connotations? Lord, if ever a term was "trigger inducing"... Sorry I didn't realize I was continuing to bring up anecdotes? How many have I brought up? The Yasmine de Leon thing is pretty interesting I'd say and germane since we almost never hear any views taking black females op-ed perspectives into consideration. And isn't the minority view supposedly the priority? So what of the minority within the minority? As for calculating just how many black fans there are of content like Dogfart's or Blacked's, if I just gave a couple names, sure that may be anecdotal. But I encourage anyone who is so outraged by this idea to actually go and count all the black fans of those brands any many other ones, like the controversial HushHush, on Twitter. They must number in the tens of thousands, a substantial percentage consider demographic data, and that's just the ones on Twitter. If we were to do the ethical calculus on this, just evaluating the tags specified in the article, I'd have to say "non-consent" must surely be ranked at the top in terms of volatility. Then much lower on the totem pole would be "cheating" then down lower would be "thug" (quite honestly, I have never seen this tag anywhere, even in the most obscure videos), then "shemale", then "interracial" (I guess?) then "teen" then "MILF" then at the bottom "big black." I mean, surely you could admit some of these are really silly to take exception to. Out of all of those, besides non-consent, the only one that really strikes me as legitimately troublesome is shemale. I understand that's not the "preferred nomenclature" to quote the Big Lebowski. But since we'd apparently all permit "non-consent" to exist as a tag unchallenged, it pretty much renders the hierarchy of the lesser offenders moot, wouldn't it? Another question I have is if the objection to the "interracial" tag is based on how it's mostly used in porn to only encompass black+white, why choose to expunge the tag altogether instead of use it more broadly, thereby enhancing the definition? If the argument is that interracial should encompass more than just black+white, why not start showing scenes with more than just black or white performers together and tag them also? Isn't that the better resolution? I don't think erasing a term is the goal if people want to redefine it. This is why I support the idea of reclaiming terms. Stoya and her partner who run that Trenchcoat site have control over the tags and their descriptors, right? So why not redefine the terms as they see fit? I'm guessing they want to push the "post-racial" notion. Good luck with that. What about people who take pride in their race, e.g. Black pride, Hispanic, Asian, Native American? More common is pride of national heritage, but isn't that an affront rooted in xenophobia? Isn't it presumed by taking pride in ones own group, it must inherently be at the expense of another? This is what all social-justice revolves around. Bah it's getting late. I still haven't ruled out that Stoya may be a mastermind troll.  [Link] |
| Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12 | Posted - Oct 5 2016 : 1:07AM I could never call anything black. Don't you know that's offensive? [:P)] Edited by - Melvyn on 10/5/2016 1:07:52 AM [Link] |
| murdock Member I'm not an actor, but I play one on TV 911 Posts 4/06 | Posted - Oct 5 2016 : 1:22AM Nobody is saying that everyone needs to adhere to her new taxonomy. She's a business owner that is catering to an audience. I'd venture a guess that most of her audience are people that take exception to some of the traditional porn tags. Why shouldn't she change to cater to her audience? As already stated, I'm all for a free market where people make whatever porn they want (among consenting adults) and market it and tag it however they want. But like several other posters here, you try to put up this front of preserving freedom, but only as it applies to the things that you like. If you're open minded enough to sell whatever pervy teen porn that you detest in your hypothetical porn store and tag it for your customers, then be open minded enough to let Stoya sell her porn in her porn store and tag it for her customers. [Link] |
| BlackSix All-Star Member pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07 | Posted - Oct 5 2016 : 5:28PM So while racism did exist in porn it was far from prominent enough to justify the anti-porner claims. As a young man I watched black-on-black and interacial porn all the time and rarely encountered any racism in the content. So much was being produced at the time I never felt the need to pick up the few obviously racist raceplay titles that did exist. Certainly the industry definition of IR is racist but that understanding of the term is not common knowledge among casual porn viewers. I'm also not a fan of terms like MILF or the emphasis on 'exotic' for non-white women. I hate when they take an asian-american woman and put them in half assed kimono outfits but again this is a tiny number of scenes. The producers who do that kind of content are almost always second rate anyway. Now if someone did a scene that was actually set in Japan's past and had a geisha that would be different. To claim though that raceplay fantasies aren't in some way racist seems absurd as they are by defintion based on racial stereotypes. That doesn't make everyone who enjoys them racist though, we allow ourselves to indulge in forbidden things in our fantasies after all. And racists are attracted to IR all the time. Just visit XPT if you want proof of that. [Link] |
| Gore Gore Girl Doctor of the Erotic Arts 7238 Posts 1/09 | Posted - Oct 5 2016 : 5:34PM [Link] |
| misspornUSA Senior Member I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13 | Posted - Oct 5 2016 : 5:51PM Edited by - misspornUSA on 10/5/2016 5:52:26 PM [Link] |
| Use the code below to link to this topic or a specific post. |
| URL of this thread |
| Link to this post with HTML |
| Link to this post with Forum Code |
