Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Active ]
[ Login ]
Log-in to remove these advertisements.

Should pornography be legal?

POST REPLY

Pornography?

Permitted without restrictions
19
22%
Permitted with some restrictions
39
46%
Forbidden with light penalties
9
11%
Strictly forbidden
10
12%
Other
8
9%
 
Total votes : 85
Soviet cogitations: 2051
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 24 Jun 2011, 08:37
Party Bureaucrat
Post 30 Jul 2012, 15:11
What legal status should pornography have under socialism?

Is it a measure of free expression or moral degradation?
Soviet America is Free America!

Under communism, there is no freedom; you are not free to live in poverty, be homeless, to be without an education, to starve, or to be without a job
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2293
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Aug 2010, 14:21
Party Bureaucrat
Post 30 Jul 2012, 15:18
It should pe heavily punished as a business. Communists can't allow that humans sell their body. Consumption of pornography however should not be punished.
Image

"Fishing is part of agriculture" Gred
"Loz, you are like me" Yami
"I am one of the better read Marxists on this site" Gred
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4953
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 13 Feb 2008, 15:25
Ideology: Other Leftist
Politburo
Post 30 Jul 2012, 18:01
Other:

OP-Bagration wrote:
It should pe heavily punished as a business. Communists can't allow that humans sell their body. Consumption of pornography however should not be punished.


This pretty much. I want to add though that I don't have a problem with so called amateur porn. All it involves is consenting adults having sex and uploading film of it onto the net for others to enjoy. No money changes hands. It's just part of normal, healthy sexuality.
Soviet cogitations: 10005
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 14 Jul 2008, 20:01
Ideology: Trotskyism
Philosophized
Post 30 Jul 2012, 18:43
Other: Nobody should be banned from using a video camera on naked people. Commercial pornography (just like anything commercial really) of course wouldn't exist under socialism because all media would be free.
"Don't know why i'm still surprised with this shit anyway." - Loz
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 139
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 21 Dec 2010, 21:39
Pioneer
Post 31 Jul 2012, 10:29
Well, in general, I think there is nothing to say against pornography. I think it shouldn't even be forbidden to do it for money, but the producing companies should be nationalized and the wages should of course be regulated. So everybody had his/her fun, the actors can earn some money, and the state can make some money as well that can be spent on social issues. To adapt Marx: "The first freedom of pornography is the freedom not to be a business."
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4032
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 27 Oct 2006, 23:10
Politburo
Post 31 Jul 2012, 10:44
If the state is making money from the sale of pornography, then it can't be anything other than a business.

Do you see how it works?
Socialist State doesn't make money,
the socialist state controls the whole of production and distribution;
the socialist sate is not just another market entity existing within a larger capitalist whole;
the socialist state cannot raise funds by selling products to itself -- such things are impossibilities because the state already had the 'money' (read: value) to begin with.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 2293
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Aug 2010, 14:21
Party Bureaucrat
Post 31 Jul 2012, 11:49
However, we could produce pornography and send it to capitalist country in order to debauch the population. Pornographers would become heroes of the people.
Image

"Fishing is part of agriculture" Gred
"Loz, you are like me" Yami
"I am one of the better read Marxists on this site" Gred
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 139
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 21 Dec 2010, 21:39
Pioneer
Post 31 Jul 2012, 13:42
Well, maybe my choice of words wasn't quite optimal. What I wanted to say is this:

If we nationalized the producing companies, the pornographers wouldn't be self-employed anymore, but "state workers". Their "employer", the socialist state, pays them a regular wage (but of course on an average level), and the profits flow directly in the goverment treasury. So they can be used for public welfare. The customer gets his porn, the actors can earn some money with it, the socialist state (thus, the whole people) benefits of it, and everybody is happy.^^

One doesn't have to agree with this idea morally, but at least it would be an option.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4465
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Mar 2010, 01:20
Ideology: None
Forum Commissar
Post 01 Aug 2012, 01:50
OP-Bagration wrote:
It should pe heavily punished as a business. Communists can't allow that humans sell their body. Consumption of pornography however should not be punished.
This seems to fit my own views on the matter.

OP-Bagration wrote:
However, we could produce pornography and send it to capitalist country in order to debauch the population. Pornographers would become heroes of the people.
I'm not if you're being serious here, but I don't like this idea very much. It reminds me too much of those Western tourists going to Cuba for the cheap prostitutes. That such a thing could occur and that Cuba is allowing their citizens to be exploited like this is disgraceful.
Soviet cogitations: 91
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 11 Dec 2011, 09:04
Pioneer
Post 01 Aug 2012, 03:02
I think it should be strictly forbidden.
But its not a big problem when its not made for making money.
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4032
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 27 Oct 2006, 23:10
Politburo
Post 01 Aug 2012, 08:21
Try to also shy away from the word 'profit' when talking about exchanges of currency going on in socialist states.
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 139
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 21 Dec 2010, 21:39
Pioneer
Post 01 Aug 2012, 12:08
Well, I have to admit that I have a little problem with the english language in that point. In German, there is a little difference between "Gewinn" and "Profit". However, when I search for the German word "Gewinn", I only find "profit" (at least in an economic connection), and so I used that word. Maybe "revenue" rather corresponds to "Gewinn", but I don't think it is exactly the same. So I used the word "profit", assuming that everybody might know what I mean.^^
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4032
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 27 Oct 2006, 23:10
Politburo
Post 01 Aug 2012, 12:34
Ok, understood. No worries.
I'll trust that you know your own language far better than me.
Soviet cogitations: 2407
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 01 Nov 2003, 13:17
Ideology: Other
Forum Commissar
Post 01 Aug 2012, 13:07
Strictly forbidden

It is "spiritual pollution" to use a term of the Chinese Communist Party in the 1980s. It will make you physically and mentally unwell. It is better not to look at it. If the masses see it then public morality will be corrupted. In a capitalist and liberal society there is a use for it, to make money. In a human oriented society where making money is not the reason for being there is no need for it. Let us do away with this reactionary filth.
[+-]
Soviet cogitations: 57
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 17 Oct 2009, 09:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Pioneer
Post 01 Aug 2012, 13:36
Permitted with some restrictions
Mankind is divided into rich and poor, into property owners and exploited; and to abstract oneself from this fundamental division; and from the antagonism between poor and rich means abstracting oneself from fundamental facts.
Joseph Stalin
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3618
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 22 Oct 2004, 15:15
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Politburo
Post 01 Aug 2012, 14:08
Well, it obviously can't be "without restrictions", because you really do want to restrict anything that does not involve consenting adults. Other than that, sure it should be allowed.

We're already seeing how Youtube-style websites for porn are both making amateur porn more readily available and making it possible to watch products from the porn "industry" without having to pay for them. In our current society, there will always be some supply of and demand for commercial productions from this industry (i.e. people still dumb enough to buy porn DVDs and people willing to act in them for payment), but this is already dying out or being forced to adapt.

I see no reason why this should not be possible in socialism as well, with a far larger amount of amateurism, or more "professional" productions only existing because the people appearing in them want to be there, as opposed to having the element of needing the money. Anyone who wants to can still go to some Youtube-style porn site to look for pirated porn from "the old days", in case they want to see women with unnaturally large breasts painfully taking it up the tailpipe while the camera zooms in on the guy's asscrack (why do they always do that in 'heterosexual' porn???); but I doubt much of that kind of thing would still be produced.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4953
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 13 Feb 2008, 15:25
Ideology: Other Leftist
Politburo
Post 01 Aug 2012, 14:32
Political Interest wrote:
Strictly forbidden

It is "spiritual pollution" to use a term of the Chinese Communist Party in the 1980s. It will make you physically and mentally unwell. It is better not to look at it. If the masses see it then public morality will be corrupted. In a capitalist and liberal society there is a use for it, to make money. In a human oriented society where making money is not the reason for being there is no need for it. Let us do away with this reactionary filth.


This is one of the things where I disagree with the line of the CCP (that's not to say that everyone in the CCP agrees with this line). At risk of taking the thread off track, tell me, what evidence do you have that watching porn negatively affects a persons physical and mental health? Why isn't taking the money out of it enough to solve the problems porn creates?

Quite to the contrary, I can show you studies which show that having a sexually open upbringing which includes access to porn can actually help reduce the likelihood individuals committing sexual crimes. I can't find the link right at this very minute, but I once read about a study which looked at prison inmates. It showed that the majority of inmates who committed sex crimes such as rape or child molestation had sexually repressed childhoods (often with religious fundamentalist parents), while inmates who were jailed for crimes which had nothing to with sex or sexual gratification mostly had a childhood which was more sexually open in which they had access to pornography.

Of course, there are certain forms of porn which should be banned. Snuff and child porn are two I can think of which should be illegal for obvious reasons. That doesn't mean however that ALL porn is negative or harmful.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4465
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 30 Mar 2010, 01:20
Ideology: None
Forum Commissar
Post 01 Aug 2012, 14:51
One consideration I wonder about is whether the volume of amateur porn will diminish with the demise of the "pointless celebrity" culture which currently exists under this mindless consumerism.

Releasing a pornographic movie has become a legitimate way for people to assert their existences and identity in the world we currently life in. I can only hope that the need for this sort of thing will fall by the wayside under socialism. If people still want to make them for their own amusement (or because they are exhibitionists, then fine), but it should certainly not be seen as a means of furthering ones career or social status.

The other thing about this sort of thing is that people seem to often upload this sort of material without due consideration for the full consequences. In a communist controlled society it just might be possible to completely remove something from the internet, but even then I wouldn't count on it. Some sort of procedures (such as a mandatory waiting period) before a person is allowed to release such material could hardly be a bad thing. If they are still keen to do so after the period has elapsed they would be allowed to do so.

Basically the state should be hindering, obstructing and discouraging this sort of thing without any outright criminal bans.

The pornography of the modern era is basically capitalism hitching a ride on the most atavistic forms of human behaviour it can make a dollar out of. That economics relations have totally subverted what could have been healthy human relationships is just a sad reality of this era - the potential hopefully still exists, but we're never likely to see it under the the current economic system and that seems to me to be the main reason why things like gender politics are never likely to find any just solution if the underlying system is not dealt with.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 14444
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 10 Sep 2006, 22:05
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Philosophized
Post 01 Aug 2012, 16:05
Of course it should be legal and produced under the auspices of the state. The reasons for this are three-fold:
1. First and formost making porn illegal forces it into a black market scenario where even greater abuses will occur and with far greater frequency.
2. Working in porn, despite the prejudices of some, is still work and all workers must be defended not just the ones whose jobs we like.
3. Through state planning we can systematically erode the most reactionary elements of modern pornography and produce a higher quality "progressive" porn.
Image
Soviet cogitations: 2051
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 24 Jun 2011, 08:37
Party Bureaucrat
Post 01 Aug 2012, 17:00
I suppose I forgot a poll option that could have read "permitted but discouraged". But that might just fit into "permitted with some restrictions"
Soviet America is Free America!

Under communism, there is no freedom; you are not free to live in poverty, be homeless, to be without an education, to starve, or to be without a job
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.