pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Jun 12 2016 : 3:24AM
I think the US laws make no sense. For me, the baseline is being able to sign up to sacrifice your life in a war, if you can do that at 18 then clearly the full rights of a citizen should apply at the same age.
I'm not posting this with locking the thread in mind--just an interesting discussion from when Axel Braun decided to shoot only with those 21 or over. I remember reading that Nina Hartley felt 21 should be the minimum age, also. I can't find it though.
The biggest issue with this that I have is the thought that at 18 it is okay for you to make the decision to go fight for your country and possibly die in action, come back with PTSD, or return with missing limbs but that having sex on camera shouldn't happen until you are 21 because you just aren't old enough to make that decision at 18. Sadly this kind of double standard is all over American society, and probably can be tracked back to the Puritan influence at the beginning of American society. Violence is fine for children to see but oh my god my child just saw a boob. I'm not sure how the decision to potentially die at 18 is okay but sucking a cock is not.
Are you sure about that? Everything I've seen from Nina on the subject is that she ardently against raising the minimum age to 21. Most people use the analogy about the military, but what about voting? An 18 year-old is supposedly intelligent enough to decide who should be have the power to launch nuclear missiles & start World War III, but aren't responsible enough to have sex on camera?
The problem I have with using voting is that isn't solely dependent on 18-20 year olds. While they have input through their vote, it is the collection of everyone's votes that decide. If 18-20 year olds vote solely decided then this November it would be Johnson vs. Sanders vs. Trump. And as to pushing the button and deciding on war, the person who is elected has to be over 35. I use the military argument since that is the same issue, use of one's own body. And why is a lasting video of one having sex more dangerous than potential death or dismemberment?
Thanks for reminding me of this thread. I agree that the two threads are very different. Alex Braun was making an individual decision, and (as far as I know) was not advocating systemic change. On that thread, you posted this link, in which Aurora Snow discussed Braun's decision, and suggested that Spiegler's approach might be better:Systemic change raises different questions, and Spiegler's approach gave me an idea. If a performer's union were to take off, then they could require that all performers on a "union set" be members of the union. A requirement for joining the union could then be having at least one discussion with an union-approved counselor. The discussion(s) could provide opportunities for the counselor to determine if the potential performer has given mature thought to their decision; the counselor could also share important information about health-related issues. If the counselor doesn't approve, the performer can't join the union. I can imagine a protocol involving 3 discussions: 1) Even if the discussion goes well, the counselor concludes with something like, "I simply cannot approve your application right now. Still, if you go home and give serious thought to some of the issues we have discussed, I will be happy to talk with you again. Alternately, you can meet with another counselor who might approve your application." (Anyone who doesn't know that the counselors always say "No" after the first interview hasn't done their research, and probably isn't ready to make the decision.) 2) If the counselor thinks the person is up for it they can say, "Yes." During this discussion, they tell the first-timer about the third discussion. 3) After filming their first scene, the new performer has a chance to say, "This wasn't for me, and I'd rather not let everyone in the world watch me have sex." Of course, this would represent a burden to producers, but it might simply be the price for marketing someone's "First time". (Alternately, the first-timer might be required to pay a kill-fee. The second interview could include gaining clarity about the kill-fee. If the potential first-time performer doesn't have enough to pay the kill fee, and hasn't discussed their decision with close friends/family who might be able to loan them the money, then they probably shouldn't be performing.) Of course, this would require some money, which could be covered by an induction fee to join the union. Anyone who is in it just for some quick cash might be put off to know that a chunk of their first paycheck would go to the Union. (The kill-fee should probably be kept as low as possible, even though the whole process is designed to benefit the person who shouldn't be performing in porn. From another perspective, the people who change their minds should pay for the whole process, but this would screw up the incentives.) Edited by - cumminglinguist on 6/12/2016 11:55:09 AM
I am so IN FAVOR of the minimum age being raised to 21. Maybe allow for 18-20 year olds to work on a porn set in a non-sex capacity to see if that's something that they really want to do. So, how do I arrive at this? I have no children and I don't frequent strip clubs; however, in my real job, I have closely worked with high school boys and girls. Some are very mature but these are not the ones I worry about. I worry about the immature ones---someone that would make a quick decision to sell his/her body to make a quick buck...and regret it. Hate to say it folks but there are plenty of immature (or worse) ones out there and you would think we would want to live in a culture that's more protective of our young. As for my "job" as a reviewer here on ADT, I have been critical of the "barely legal" porn niche (and what I consider ignorant types of porn--see my review of Cum Bang 6) so I have been pretty much towing that line all along. I have quit watching this type of stuff but knowing full well that it will exist and continue to exist whether the age requirement is raised to 21 or not. ---T0MBOne---
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Jun 12 2016 : 12:01PM
Like I said on the Union thread, why 21? The number seems arbitrary. More and more neuroscientists agree that the brain does not reach full maturity until about the age of 25. I have yet to hear any rational arguments why 21 is special. To argue that 21 is the right age because it's the drinking age presupposes that 21 should be the drinking age.
^ Perhaps it's time to raise the age of majority to 25 for all things, given the advances in neuroscience (and the propensity for more and more people in their early 20s to still be living at home). I wouldn't be a fan of that, but I would have trouble arguing against the science of it. Whereas the arbitrary ages of 18 and 21 (and 19 for drinking here in Ontario) offer me little reason to get behind.
The higher you raise "age minimums" the more people are breaking the law. Because once most humans hit 15 or 16, they want a taste of everything and the law can be damned. Will a 21 year old woman make a more reasoned approach to turning to porn as opposed to an 18 year old? I suppose there is more likely hood, however, there are plenty of 21 year old train wrecks out there who are making bad choices every day. Humans make choices they regret throughout an lifetime. It is not specific to age. I can see the argument to raise the porn minimum; however, I would not see the over all benefit. There will still be plenty of 21 year old girls regretting that BJ video they did for 500 bucks in Florida, or the drug addict doing porn and hating herself. We can't take those bad stories and blanket an entire business. I am sure we could all put together a long list of women who started porn under the age of 21 that have successful lives, long lasting careers, and have settled into post porn life doing just fine. And, just like with condom laws , what happens if you mandate 21.... people will film porn elsewhere and if you really try to enforce that law, you push porn underground which makes it more dangerous for the young women. Best to keep it at 18 and out in the open. Edited by - Canadian_Cindy on 6/12/2016 1:30:14 PM
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Jun 12 2016 : 2:15PM
Indeed. I don't want the minimum age raised to 25, or raised at all, but at least there's a real argument behind that number while I haven't seen such an argument for raising the age to 21.
^ I'd say that 21 is a compromise position. I'm for it. As I said in a different thread, my experience with my 19-year-old son and his friends of both sexes points me in that direction.
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Jun 12 2016 : 2:37PM
^I raised a daughter, and I was a teenager once who entered the sex industry (stripping, not porn, but still sex work imo), so I too have my personal experiences to consider, but let's look at the science. A brain at 21 is still an immature brain. It seems to me that some are saying "An 18 year old's brain hasn't fully matured yet, so let's bar her from the industry until she's 21, when her brain still hasn't fully matured yet." Edited by - misspornUSA on 6/12/2016 2:40:16 PM
The topic of the 'correct' minimum age for porn is difficult enough. I don't think we should extend it here to all things, particularly in respect of the drinking age, which in most European countries is 18 or lower anyway, and the age of consent which varies widely within the world at large. Do you want to criminalise thousands of young people for having sex or drinking alcohol, effectively ruining their future prospects, at 18, 19, etc? Do you raise the voting age and disenfranchise millions of people affected directly by the outcome of an election and still call your country a democracy? Not in my view, no. I do see an argument for making the 'porn-age' 21 on the basis that having consensual sex with a person at 18 is not the same as the decision to make a living out of having sex for public consumption. But if you live in a country where you not only give the label 'adult' to an 18 year old and also allow them to have sex legally then it's hard to justify preventing that sexually active person from pursuing a career in an industry which is itself legal. The union can take a decision but it may have the effect of dissuading the very performers who need union protection most - the youngest - from signing up. Legislation by the government of the day would be required to limit the age for porn but beware of lobbying any government on that basis because once the debate in the legislative body is let loose, the risk then exists that conservative members might take the view that 21 is not old enough; moreover, it may open the door for a wider restriction on porn activities in general a la UK or Japan. There is no perfect age - as has been said, some people mature faster than others. I am just about persuaded that 18 is the most appropriate but could still be swayed by arguments to the contrary.
For me, opting for 21 represents a balancing of diverse interests (e.g., paternalism vs. autonomy). Age 21 is close to a mid-point between 18 and 25. I would be even better with 22. Edited by - bob on 6/12/2016 2:57:46 PM
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Jun 12 2016 : 3:00PM
^I think that many who favor 21 do so because it's the legal drinking age in the US. That's my general impression. EDIT: This was a reply to the earlier version of your comment. Edited by - misspornUSA on 6/12/2016 3:01:21 PM
I'd be fine with any number above 18 so if people think that 18 is too low and 21 is too high than how about 20. This way you get to more or less disappoint everyone. I can see where someone would look at the minimum age for enrolling in the armed forces being 18 when the age for drinking and now possibly doing porn is 21 as being skewed. All I'm going to say about this is that the people looking to enroll choose to do that knowing most of the consequences. I don't think the vast majority of the people choosing to do porn do so by choice so much as circumstance and most do not have all the necessary info to make an educated decision. Not that raising the minimum age to 20 or 21 will in any mean that they are now more educated than at 18 but they should at the very least a little more mature and that is not a bad thing.
^^ For sure, that's part of my opposition as well. I'm not a die-hard teen genre fan, but two of my all-time favorite performers, Keri Sable and Sasha Grey, were both 18 when they entered the industry. And a lot of my current favorites wouldn't be allowed in the industry if this were the law: Alex Grey, Aidra Fox, Megan Rain, and Abella Danger just to name a few. The hidden premise behind your comment is that having a preference as a fan is somehow an illegitimate reason for opposing this proposal, which doesn't make much sense in my book. People who like something that is perfectly legal shouldn't feel ashamed to state their preference and defend it.
I'm pretty conflicted about this myself. There's no question in my mind that some girls plunge into the business at 18 or 19 without having the maturity to weigh the personal implications of their decision, and some may spend the rest of their lives regretting it. But I think this is true of many other life decisions that can be made at 18, and the reality is that most porn stars already have a pretty short life span in the industry - a small percentage go on to become directors and MILFs, but most are finished in the business well before they hit 30 due to competition from younger up-and-comers and/or just getting burned out from the demands of the job. As with fashion models, the 18-20 age range is a sweet spot in terms of demand and in many cases a 21+ restriction would significantly shrink the already narrow window most models have to make the kind of money that makes the career choice worthwhile for them to begin with. And for some young performers, porn is the only realistic way to finance the college education they want without incurring a mountain of debt. In the interest of full disclosure, I'll readily admit my opinion is influenced by the fact that some of my favorite stars did awesome work before they were 21 (the most recent example being Lana Rhoades who apparently has been stamped as "mature enough" to perform by Mark Spiegler at age 19). It would be wonderful if there were a benign performers union or more agents like Spiegler to counsel and screen out the youngsters likely to become train wrecks, but given that the industry as a whole is so obsessed with youth (ain't that America) I'm pretty skeptical about this coming to pass.
Better to be pissed on, than to be pissed off. 248 Posts 1/15
Posted - Jun 12 2016 : 5:00PM
We don't need a nanny state, agency, or union telling adults what is best for them within the bounds of consensual sexual performance. At the age of 18 you are an adult, not only in terms of the way society sees and treats you, but in terms of your development. Going into porn is a good decision for some, an okay decision for many, and ultimately a decision that some regret too. As adults, we should be free to make decisions about consensual sexual activities, whether good or bad, and live with the consequences. Anything that limits that is a true injustice.
[Link]
Canadian_Cindy Deactivated User
1102 Posts 2/15
Posted - Jun 12 2016 : 5:57PM
It isn't that simple. I don't have a "barely legal" fetish. I just think women making good or bad choices in regards to porn, drugs, boyfriends, etc can happen at 18 or 21. It really is not going to change the landscape if specific problems is what they are trying to address. You can make a long list of women, like i said, who started before 21 and have had good careers. You can find train wrecks who started porn in their mid 20s or some people who filmed some stuff in their 30s and regret it. I just think it is a smokescreen issue that does not address whatever issues they are trying to address. There are other ways to help young women make informed decisions, such as education campaigns about the realities of porn life and it's long term pros and cons. They do very little of that because they don't want to turn girls away. An uninformed girl, is uninformed whether she is 18 or 23. And if 21 is jut being picked because it is the US drinking age; please try to open your minds up at realize that most civilized nations allow drinking at lower numbers (we are 19 in Canada, 18 in one of our provinces), and there is not some major social destruction over the different ages. Any 19 or 20 year old that lives within driving distance of the Canadian border is coming up drinking on weekends whenever they want. Arbitrary ages do not solve social problems; if someone is not educated on a particular issue they won't magically be injected with information because the number on their age ticks up another year or two. Time being alive does not automatically equate to being more knowledgeable. For us middle aged people, the reason we know more is because we made all sorts of dumb choices and risky moments in life. it isn't because we have older brain cells. A 43 year old who has lived a sheltered life and never left the building will be just as empty as a brash 19 year old. so, if the goal is to lower the amount of girls making "decisions they regret"; then unload educational tools, get all the companies to provide new performers with some vids to watch, some app on their phones or something....... making them wait 3 more years and still not educating them will end up with the same results. Edited by - Canadian_Cindy on 6/12/2016 6:03:47 PM
Oh my pleeasse this is like a joke I'm not going to ask if it is as I'm sure it's not but come on man teen porn is a HUGE market. It's so hot when you get an 18 or 19 year old girl taking Adriano up her ass and so many have, and they love it man! Everyone wins. 18 year olds are accepted as adults, and as far as I'm aware all 18 years olds in the US can have sex, as I believe the only ages of consent are 16, 17 and 18 in the US. I just think it would be hugely counter productive for the industry. 21? Not even 20, man that's three years later. Also i believe that a lot of girls aged 18-20 participate in porn because they need money quite badly, I understand it can be very tough for young Americans especially in some parts of the country.. I'm in the UK and I feel we don't have it as tough at least financially actually. Porn is a short-term opportunity at the least for these girls, long-term opportunity in some cases.. but I'm saying some girls wouldn't have gotten by so well if they could not have done some porn to support them while in college. Also I feel very confident in speculating that there surely would be a hech of a lot more 18-20 year old prostitutes if legal age for porn was 21. People don't even obey legal ages in prostitution man you get kids doing it and it's sick and heart breaking. Deny 18-20 the right to participate in porn and loads more of them will be hooking as they say, and that job is damn sure more dangerous, more hazardous more unhealthy. Except maybe high end escorts, I'm talking really high end classy escorts. Prostitution has so many more problems, needs so much more management, than porn does in my opinion. But what because porn is on display where anyone can see it they need to boss the porn industry about so it looks like they're taking care of the porn 'problem' (a delusion because I don't believe there really is a porn problem and I think the porn industry is probably better now all things considered than it has ever been before)? While prostitution, homeless street kids turning tricks under age euurrrghh makes me feel sick.. but they can just brush that under the carpet because it's not so blatant not so on display, it's practically hidden anyway so they don't want to draw more attention to it they would rather just sweep it under the carpet. It's a crippling attitude, like with sex slaves too.. that atrocity of an.. 'industry' does not get enough attention like barely anyone cares about young women being kidknapped and literally being slaves for sex... No. The porn legal age is spot on man.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Jun 12 2016 : 6:52PM
The science claiming brains aren't mature until the mid-20s is very preliminary and spotty but some are using it to push forward social policy around juvenile offenders they support. So I would take that with a grain of salt, the media does a terrible job of treating some studies as if they are scientifically proven fact.
Better to be pissed on, than to be pissed off. 248 Posts 1/15
Posted - Jun 12 2016 : 7:48PM
Testing out what happens when 18 year olds are given the same decision making privileges as 21 year olds, except for alcohol, is an experiment that has already happened on a national scale - it is the United States. I don't think anyone really believes 21 year olds make decisions that are so much better than 18 year olds. You don't need advanced brain imaging to tell you that. Edited by - LPee23 on 6/12/2016 7:49:14 PM Edited by - LPee23 on 6/12/2016 7:49:37 PM
Speaking as someone who has raised grown children, those three years can make an enormous difference in terms of rationality. But everyone is different and many people are intellectually & emotionally equipped to make good decisions at 18 or earlier. I think the reason the U.S. keeps the legal drinking age at 21 is because drunk driving impacts so many others aside from the perpetrator and traffic fatalities consistently decreased in those states where the legal age was raised from 18 to 21.
At some point, you have to let go and let people make their own mistakes. If we as a society are going to say that people are adults when they're 18, that should mean that they get to make their own decisions about what to do with their bodies at 18, no matter how much of a mistake it may be for some of them.
Dude, I wish I could've made such a righteous, sensible statement in such succinct fashion. Damn well said man, I tend to struggle summing things up succinctly and end up writing block paragraphs as I did above haha.
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Jun 13 2016 : 6:08PM
^.
[Link]
Rosco Fuji Deactivated User
On the licking stick, Mr. Magic Dick! 3309 Posts 2/09
Posted - Jun 13 2016 : 7:57PM
I say drop it to age 17. As far as a porn union is concerned, seriously? You'd have to deal with the whole seniority aspect. So, I guess that'd mean that a 20 year vet would get first crack at all the available jobs first, leaving none for the newbies. Then, on top of that, in accordance to porn rules and job descriptions, an anal girl wouldn't be able to do vag, the I/R girls could only do black guys, the performers would have to pay union dues, etc.etc.
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Jun 19 2016 : 11:17AM
I don't find Lane's appeal to the US tradition of enshrining 21 as a special age compelling at all. That the prefrontal cortex isn't mature until the age of 25 is a compelling argument. "'Cause it's more in keeping with the American way!" is not. On another note, I got a "Page Not Found" when I clicked that link. If anyone else is too, try this. Edited by - misspornUSA on 6/19/2016 11:27:41 AM
My thoughts--there is, as usual, no discussion of why "King forfeited her title — and endured worldwide ogling, ridicule and moralizing." I'm not saying whether the law should be changed either way, but ignoring why sex workers (particularly female ones) are subject to such horrible persecution hardly helps anyone. It just lets everyone off the hook who should really be under scrutiny and keeps the burden of accountability on the sex worker.
I ♥ the male gaze (and Palestine). 8737 Posts 11/13
Posted - Jun 19 2016 : 4:53PM
I disagree with smiffy but I don't find the suggestion creepy at all. Sex between men and 16 and 17 year olds has been commonplace all over the world for all of human history. As of late the laws have changed in some places, but law does not determine desire, and considering how far back this particular desire goes and how very widespread it has always been I don't expect it to change, even if - depending on where we live - we're supposed to all pretend that it has suddenly become weird and deviant for adults to be attracted to 16 and 17 year olds.
Dirty Wives Club 43 - review by Captain Jack
Posted - Jun 12 2016 : 3:01AM
