Porn = not vegan

[Beck Bristow]

Should we be discussing the fact that by these notions, acting in general is 'not vegan' by some definitions?

Almost all who act professionally are being exploited to some degree by those using them to make far more money via their performances. They're putting on a false show for entertainment, giving us something that isn't true. They're often glamorisng things we're opposed to, things which conflict with our pesonal ethics. I guess this means that watching television and film is not vegan to some here? Where do we draw that final line in the sand to create new definitions for veganism based on what we want it to be rather than the direct definition?

Not all who are in porn consider themselves exploited and like their work. Some consider themselves to be the ones wielding power in their occupation and enjoy it. Conversely, not all who are in porn are happy with what they do, and some I'm sure are living in misery. It goes both ways. Some people in the porn industry are happier in their work than some of us here. Others may kill themselves because of what they've gotten into. I find it comical that some people who shun porn act as if they speak for the entire industry based on the supposed truths they've learned from those who suffered in the industry. You can find plenty of exploitation in numerous industries, but porn is the hot button for many while others are overlooked. It's identical to someone telling you that they heard from a few ex-vegans that the vegan lifestyle is horrible, and that we're all secretly miserable but put on a good show. Please, let us be a bit more open to the possibility that a few people do not speak absolute truth for an entire industry simply because they mirror our stance against it.

When I spent a few years in my mid-20s working in a casino in Las Vegas, I met more than a few people in the porn biz. Some told me tales of how they were saving to get out, some told me that they'd hoped to continue as long as they could. For a few, it was what they felt was the only way to make good money without a college education. Others thought it was going to be much more glamorous and were disappointed with the truth of where they ended up. The one thing all of them told me was, they made this choice, and they had to live with their decision. None of them told tales of abduction, forced drug use, or any of the made-for-television-movie things that the anti-porn side like to insist is the standard. I'm sure it's happened many times to people who entered the industry in bad ways, but many people enter of free will and are not as miserable as you may want to believe.

Some are making far too broad of generalisations based on their own opposition to porn. I am fully cognizant of many people's hatred for it and can sympathize. I have no problem with a choice to detest porn, and I'm not even slightly fond of it myself. But trying to say that it can only be unethical and is somehow not vegan [please tell me where in Watson's original definition does it cover external issues such as porn] is absurd. We may as well start a new topic discussing how everything we oppose is somehow not vegan and use a few snippets from disgruntled workers in any industry to back up our argument. I'm awaiting topics about how guns aren't vegan, Wal-Mart isn't vegan, and so on and so forth. Let us not re-write the definition to suit our needs, rather, keep a separation of our own personal ethics on non-realted subjects and what veganism truly means. They can intertwine, but there should be a clear boundary as to what is defined and what is our interpretation. I've never believed that it's good for the word to have everyone put their hands into changing the definition to make it suit their own ideals. Let us not edit the term like a bad Wikipedia page, or it will lose its true meaning in time.

This isn't the introduction I'd hope to start off with, but I've been suckered in right proper for my initial post.

[downhillingdemon]

...and a damn fine initial post it is too

[XkillerX]

There's a few Fairtrade options for stuff like chocolate and bananas these days, surely it wouldn't be too hard to make fairtrade, ethical porn films.

From what I've see, there's not much in the way of exotic locations, expensives sets and special effects involved. Two vegan actors, a suburban bedroom, a cameraman and away you go. No more than a couple of hundred quid.

I'm not volunteering to take part or buy the finished product, but it's got to be a way to keep everyone happy.

I'm on it.

The only alternative seems to be vegpr0n, and I have no fucking clue why anybody would want to pay 5$ a month for that

[Dave Noisy]

Thanks for the props.

The rationalization continues...

Some people you met claim they weren't coerced while chatting at a casino.

What exactly is this supposed to prove?

That the majority of porn is like this? That it's okay now, and there's no need to worry?

Or that it's okay for a few? And if you can track down those few, it's okay to watch their videos? (And there's no need to question or doubt their responses, they *said* they wanted to!! No one's *ever* said they wanted to do something, but really didn't mean it! Especially in casinos!!)

Rock solid intro there.

Let me tell you a story about a cow who wanted to become a hamburger.

[Johnboy74]

I get the impression here that people are seeing porn in a blinkered way (step back and look at the bigger porn picture), men (supposedly) exploiting/fucking women in aggressive/abusive ways...max hardcore or whatever he's called... what about gay porn and more specifically lesbian porn made by lesbians for lesbians... then again, straight porn made by women targeting women/couples...

[Beck Bristow]

I've been lurking long enough to be well-acquainted with your use of bizarre logic to suit your arguments, so I was prepared for you to decide to use specious reasoning to my reply.

What does the fact that I conversed with them while being a blackjack dealer have to do with credibility, as you seem to imply? Can we start a topic about how gambling isn't vegan now, or how porn corrupts and turns all who enter into slaves to every vice? I imagine you're just itching to try and find some new way to attack, but let's cut that part short.

The fact that these people were willing to talk openly about their experiences [the location is irrelevant no matter how much you may want it to have bearing] means that, while you get your info from sources that only back up your viewpoint, I got mine from people who didn't hold back and were open about both the good and bad. Note that I did say good AND bad, while so many here think only in absolutes because it suits their agenda. Hmmm, which person's experience seems more valid, that of the one who has had a share of conversations with both well-known and relatively-unknown people in the biz, or someone whose only mission is to find fault in porn in general and only reads what will further their argument? Acknowledging that not everything is as terrible as you want it to be doesn't make your side any more true, no matter how much you coerce yourself into taking it as the only way.

I'm saying that I've spoken with over a dozen people in the industry who were candid off-the-clock and were happy to talk about their experiences both good and bad. I'm not saying that this covers everyone in porn across the board, but it's far more honest than simply taking something like Linda Lovelace's story and saying that it speaks for everyone. Of course, if you're on the anti-side and won't listen to anything you don't want to hear, you'll gladly ignore everything other than your pre-conceived notions and hold on to them dearly. That, my friend, is what you're doing. You're claiming that porn exploits everyone, that everyone sensible is offended and outraged by it [or, that they should be offended and outraged], and that it only hurts those who star in it or who view it. That's not accurate. YOU might be offended by it, but that doesn't mean everyone is or should be. YOU speak as if everyone who ever starred in porn was forced into it and ended up broken afterward. While this may be true for some people, for most, that is not true. YOU pretend that your snippets of stories that back up your own anti-porn stance are all-encompassing and are the straight truth. That's not the case. If you wish to keep deluding yourself about how you seem to know everything about everyone who got involved, then brother, go right ahead. Nobody can stop someone from refusing to acknowledge that they're not 100% right. As I've seen before in arguments here, you're not really open to anything but what you alreday believe to be truth. And I guarantee that even with slapping a healthy dose of reality here to show you aren't always correct, you won't even consider a different possibility. And round and round we go.

Fact stands, I've met some people who screw for money who seem pretty content with themselves and look at porn as one thing: a job. They don't live to flaunt their naked bits at every moment, and they don't wear their occupation on their sleeve when a shoot is over. Regardless of your decision to believe that this can't be true, it is. Sorry to break it to you.

Apparently you decided not to pay attention to much of my initial post. I said that I'm not defending the industry, as I don't watch porn and don't have a need for it. It never did it do anything for me. I'm not saying it's good, and I'm not saying that people haven't been exploited by it. Let me reiterate the main points again:

I'm saying that people trying to re-write the definition of veganism are doing a disservice to the term, and that maybe people need to grasp that not all people in porn are being exploited, and not all porn is made to be exploitative.

You're trying to draw parallels between porn and animal agriculture, which is laughable at best in your attempts. It's a terrible strawman argument that doesn't have a valid leg to stand on. Attack porn for what you will in a way that makes sense, at least, rather than relying on bad logic and flawed arguments to try and make a point. I have no problem with you hating porn and attacking it, but I do have a problem with bad arguments and worthless comparisons. Let's not get into bullshit where we start saying it's not vegan, because it's no less vegan than the calendar on my wall in front of me. But, if we just keep editing the definition enough, we can make it non-vegan, regardless of the truth. Do you actually think that would be best?

Yes, sir, I can truly see the comparison between someone who may feel that they want to go into porn and make a very good salary by their own accord, and animals raised to be slaughtered for our own purposes. If you can't find the flawed logic in your attempts to attack porn, then you've got much bigger problems than I'd envisioned. When porn stars are forced into stalls, banged silly without pay and slaughtered afterward, then I'll agree with you. I hope you can see the absurdity in your comparisons.

For the record, I did NOT want this to get personal and become an attack. I was simply stating truth, that you can't know for sure that everything is as terrible as you want to believe. That not every porn star is exploited, and that not everyone who views porn is destroying a family or using it to objectify the same or opposite sex in a negative way. I don't see what's so difficult to understand about this. You chose to make this personal, and I'm only reacting accordingly. I'm more than happy to keep this civil if we can lay off the attacks on credibility [re: the worthless focus on the mention of my work in a casino] and be open to the possibility that perhaps we're not all-knowing and all correct 100% of the time. Is that fair?

[Beck Bristow]

I get the impression here that people are seeing porn in a blinkered way (step back and look at the bigger porn picture), men (supposedly) exploiting/fucking women in aggressive/abusive ways...max hardcore or whatever he's called... what about gay porn and more specifically lesbian porn made by lesbians for lesbians... then again, straight porn made by women targeting women/couples...

That would require more people to think beyond their main issue of men objectifying and exploiting women as being all porn. Be careful, because this might shatter a few notions by speaking the truth about how porn has many categories and many target audiences.

[Andrewc]

what about gay porn and more specifically lesbian porn made by lesbians for lesbians

Let's get serious here, who do you really think is the targeted demographic of lesbian porn?

Porn may be unethical, immoral, and exploitative, but I do struggle to find an intrinsic link between veganism and the sex industry. Where do you draw the line?

My actions are not dictated by the thought that something may or may not be "vegan". I prefer to make choices based on my own ethics, and those ethics happen to correlate with the ethics of veganism.

With this in mind my choice to not view pornography and to not consume or wear animals are both based on ethics but are separate.

[Johnboy74]

That would require more people to think beyond their main issue of men objectifying and exploiting women as being all porn. Be careful, because this might shatter a few notions by speaking the truth about how porn has many categories and many target audiences.

Agreed

Let's get serious here, who do you really think is the targeted demographic of lesbian porn?

Obviously your not aware of genuine lesbian porn! Completely different to male targeted lesbian porn!

[Andrewc]

Let's get serious here, who do you really think is the targeted demographic of lesbian porn?

Obviously your not aware of genuine lesbian porn! Completely different to male targeted lesbian porn!

For sure, I have no idea what the difference would be, but I'm willing to bet that a substantial amount of lesbian porn produced is for males.

[Beck Bristow]

Porn may be unethical, immoral, and exploitative, but I do struggle to find an intrinsic link between veganism and the sex industry. Where do you draw the line?

My actions are not dictated by the thought that something may or may not be "vegan". I prefer to make choices based on my own ethics, and those ethics happen to correlate with the ethics of veganism.

With this in mind my choice to not view pornography and to not consume or wear animals are both based on ethics but are separate.

This is the kind of anti-porn stance I can appreciate, one that does not involve redefining a word that has nothing to do with pornography. Nor does it try to make comparisons that are badly-drawn.

One thing to note, there is a growing movement of lesbians who are buying more man-on-man pornography. Not being a lesbian, I do not know the reasons, but I've been hearing more about this over the past year. It's rather comical watching my non-hetero male friends discuss it and be freaked out by the whole thing.

[vegabunni]

Thank you for posting this! It is incredible! I just know it's not going to stop those who use it to get off...maybe it will with some. I just know when it comes to men they "need" the visuals *barf*

[helmut]

Beck Bristow, i think its true that people can be exploited in many industries. and yes, just because an industry is notorious for exploitation, it doesn't mean that every single person in it has suffered horrific abuse. but for me, hearing a handful of horror stories is enough. it should be enough. i've never heard of any other industry (particularly entertainment related) with such a potential to abuse its workers. the outbreaks of HIV and poor STI testing is telling enough. and its not just about men abusing women, though that can often be the case - its about all workers being treated like they are worthless or expendable. interestingly though i have heard that the gay porn industry is much more rigorous with the use of condoms.

great that you have been able to chat with porn stars through your work. i would be really interested to hear what they have said. but i don't believe that your anecdotal evidence constitutes a good argument that porn is not an exploitative industry - like i said, the figures relating to STIs and HIV are astounding. drug use seems like it is rife (though of course that is based on other anecdotal evidence). so facts and figures aside i guess we are both armed with anecdotal evidence. however i would ask you, do you think people lie about treatment they have received when they have been sexually abused/harassed/exploited etc? do you think people cover up such things? or would you prefer to think that people are more likely to lie and say such things HAVE happened to them when they in fact haven't?

i have a tendency to think that much of what goes on goes unreported/untold. so the handful of stories we do have are not as isolated as you might think. however that is merely my opinion and based on the idea of other kinds of crimes and abuse that go under or unreported - sexual assault, domestic violence etc.

in any case, the industry needs a violent overhaul and consumers should be aware of what they are supporting. porn may be indeed vegan by dictionary definition but i suppose i thought i would find an audience in vegans - people who are likely to be empathetic to the suffering of others, human and non human.

[Heinrich]

You dont wanna know the horror stories of bar/club workers. How they get shit paid if even and have to work their ass of. Drug abuse is also very common.
Not to speak of chefs.
And dont get me started on TV people...
Should we also add the potential affair with a secretary?

Everything that has to do with sexuality is and probably will always be controverse and highly offensive to some.

I saw the documenary "9 to 5 days in porn" and I can recommend it.
It tries to avoid judgement so you have to make up your own mind.

The one thing that stuck to me most is this:
What is abusive/offensive/over the line for you might not be for the one doing it/performing.
To you, getting choked may feel horroble and assulting, the girl next door might get a kick out of it. It doesnt mean that one should choke everybody but it also doesnt mean that its bad for everybody to get choked.
People are different.

[Beck Bristow]

Beck Bristow, i think its true that people can be exploited in many industries. and yes, just because an industry is notorious for exploitation, it doesn't mean that every single person in it has suffered horrific abuse. but for me, hearing a handful of horror stories is enough.

Fully understandable. There unquestionably are many people in the industry who are chewed up and spat out with no regard for their well-being. Like I've said here more than once, I don't support pornography by viewing or purchasing it, I don't recommend that people go out and do so. If one is appalled by it, by all means, be against it.

i've never heard of any other industry (particularly entertainment related) with such a potential to abuse its workers.

Start digging more into acting in general, and you'll find that it can be as seedy as porn in many ways. That's why I was drawing the parallel between the fact that many people in non-pornographic acting roles have been subjected to terrible things relating to sex, drugs and abuse so that it's difficult for me to draw the line at one being significantly worse than the other. If you plan on going into porn, you know to a degree as to what will happen. Imagine young stars-to-be who are forced to shag more than a few people just to get a foot in the door, people who feel the need to fit the lifestyle and get into drugs, etc. It's very, very similar, only one has their dirty laundry out in the open and the other prefers to keep it behind closed doors as much as possible.

the outbreaks of HIV and poor STI testing is telling enough. and its not just about men abusing women, though that can often be the case - its about all workers being treated like they are worthless or expendable. interestingly though i have heard that the gay porn industry is much more rigorous with the use of condoms.

It should definitely be better enforced for testing and prevention for porn actors and actresses. Anyone who thinks otherwise is crazy. But, workers being treated as worthless and expendable is a case in many fields, many of which are ones you would not expect [thank you to Heinrich for making mention of this.] That's why I can't feel a need to single porn out from other areas, because the problem is not exclusive to porn but is a sad condition across the board in the way of worker treatment.

Gay porn does seem to be considerably more attentive to the issue of condoms. I'm sure that it's partly because of the gay/HIV stigma, and also, in that many people in male gay porn are not actually gay. There are many men in that area of the biz who willingly do it for the income and are neither gay nor do they have interest in men. However, when the money is there, people will do many things to get it, be it from greed or necessity. As long as it's fair and concensual, I don't see it as being any more exploitative than working in a warehouse, except that they hourly wage is much better.

great that you have been able to chat with porn stars through your work. i would be really interested to hear what they have said. but i don't believe that your anecdotal evidence constitutes a good argument that porn is not an exploitative industry - like i said, the figures relating to STIs and HIV are astounding. drug use seems like it is rife (though of course that is based on other anecdotal evidence). so facts and figures aside i guess we are both armed with anecdotal evidence. however i would ask you, do you think people lie about treatment they have received when they have been sexually abused/harassed/exploited etc? do you think people cover up such things? or would you prefer to think that people are more likely to lie and say such things HAVE happened to them when they in fact haven't?

I definitely do not believe that my experience in chatting with some actors and actresses constitutes absolutes, but I'm pleased that I got to hear things candidly without a bias toward the pro or con. Trust me, I heard a share of bad things said, so it is not all sunshine and rainbows. I only wanted to make the point of talking about this as some people are unfortunately under the impression that porn will 100% ruin the person who gets into the business, which is not the case. I just have a problem when people take the arguments that suit only one side and thrust it in my face as if it spoke for the entire industry, which is how Dave Noisy was attempting to present it. It's scare tactics, and while there's plenty of scary stuff in porn, it's not all absolutes in black and white. Just as well, I do not believe all the 'happy porn' talk, because there's enough evidence out there to show it isn't all good. I'm simply trying to mediate to say that there are people in the industry who are exploited and miserable as well as those who enjoy it and are comfortable, and we need to accept this whether we're pro-porn, anti-porn, or neutral. Neutrality can be done reasonably in a situation that is not in absolutes. That is why I can't stomach the comparisons to factory farming that were made by others.

Based on the conversations I've had with porn folks, I'd say that they tend to hold back very little about their experiences. Once they open up about what they do, and if they don't see a degree of disgust in your eyes, they tend to open up quite a bit. Once you know they shag for money, there isn't much need for them to hold back if you're genuinely interested in their stories. I'm sure some people left out bad things that happend, others may have left out good things as well. We can only speculate. But again, I have no issue at all with anyone who is opposed to it. There are enough reasons one can be personally against porn in general, and everyone is entitled to feel as they wish. But, I will be riled when it gets too intertwined with veganism, because while I agree compassion is essential, I can't feel too sorry|compassionate|what-have-you for those who are neither exploited nor unhappy. I view it like any other job in a risky industry. It is just that this industry is based on sex, which some people get all in a huff over because of their own beliefs. That's fine and dandy, but I do not like false statements, bad parallels and outright misinformation which is too prevalent by both the pro and con side. Hence my choice to remain neutral.

i have a tendency to think that much of what goes on goes unreported/untold. so the handful of stories we do have are not as isolated as you might think. however that is merely my opinion and based on the idea of other kinds of crimes and abuse that go under or unreported - sexual assault, domestic violence etc.

It's very much possible. Pretty well everything bad that happens is under-reported in regard to how often it happens. It's unfortunate that people would choose to suffer in silence rather than tackle their problems, but that is human nature and worthy of it's own thread.

in any case, the industry needs a violent overhaul and consumers should be aware of what they are supporting. porn may be indeed vegan by dictionary definition but i suppose i thought i would find an audience in vegans - people who are likely to be empathetic to the suffering of others, human and non human.

Agreed about the overhaul, I think that those in the sex industry should have better control over their safety and should be less worried about being taken absolute advantage of.

But, I cannot be completely anti-porn based on the fact that there are still many people who do it by complete choice, are happy with their work, and do not have their lives destroyed by it. Porn will never go away, but working to 'fix' the existing problems to some degree might have an impact to make life better for those in the biz. I'm not going to get into the other issues of it here, but for worker treatment, I definitely feel that there should be more to protect those who get into that line of work. So, at least we can agree on something .