[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
BADASSES

Return ]

Posting mode: Reply
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 58983)
Message
File  []
close
057e8432dc03813e9b09cf82ef38e1d3--rainbow-sky-over.jpg
589835898358983
>> No. 58983 Ambulancelad
12th November 2017
Sunday 6:00 pm
58983 spacer
Lads, I've just had an unnerving thought.

Whenever I find myself on the likes of Pornhub I have noticed that there is an increasing trend for "incest" videos. These are usually labelled as mother fucking son or step-brother fucking step-sister.

Now we all know that porn corrupts minds by making people think extreme behaviour has been normalised; it is well known that many "millennials" see throat-fucking as standardised sexual activity and that an increasing number of lasses are being pressured into it.

Therefore, it stands to reason that the porn industry normalising incest will lead to a rise in it, and also people molesting younger siblings, happening.
Expand all images.
>> No. 58984 Are Moaty
12th November 2017
Sunday 6:03 pm
58984 spacer
>NOW WE ALL KNOW THAT PORN CORRUPTS MINDS BY MAKING PEOPLE THINK EXTREME BEHAVIOUR HAS BEEN NORMALISED; IT IS WELL KNOWN THAT MANY "MILLENNIALS" SEE THROAT-FUCKING AS STANDARDISED SEXUAL ACTIVITY AND THAT AN INCREASING NUMBER OF LASSES ARE BEING PRESSURED INTO IT.

Hmm...
>> No. 58985 Moralfag
12th November 2017
Sunday 6:05 pm
58985 spacer
>>58983
A Twitch streamer I watch has a burgeoning series in which he challenges people to present a moral argument against incest itself and so far everyone has struggled.
>> No. 58986 Anonymous
12th November 2017
Sunday 6:10 pm
58986 spacer

pornhub insights.png
589865898658986

>> No. 58987 Billbob
12th November 2017
Sunday 6:10 pm
58987 spacer
>>58985
Defective kids.

In communities where marriage to relatives is encouraged, like Norfolk and laplanderstan, there's a disproportionately high number of defective kids.
>> No. 58988 Are Moaty
12th November 2017
Sunday 6:11 pm
58988 spacer
>>58983
Don't be soft. I didn't need porn to tell me to knob my aunt.
>> No. 58989 Ambulancelad
12th November 2017
Sunday 6:14 pm
58989 spacer
>>58983

> IT IS WELL KNOWN THAT MANY "MILLENNIALS" SEE THROAT-FUCKING AS STANDARDISED SEXUAL ACTIVITY

You're going to need to show your working here lad.
>> No. 58991 Moralfag
12th November 2017
Sunday 6:33 pm
58991 spacer
I noticed that it is always (apparently) step-family doing it which is weird as doing your step-sister when you're both in your 20s isn't exactly Auntie-fucking. It's probably even more mundane when they're 'teens' because them experimenting together is about as predictable as the sunrise.

Anyway, the idea intrigued me so after doing some research I discovered that the pornographic industry do it just be extra cautious around the jurisdictions they operate under. This is itself strange because nine times out of ten it is some shitty quality Slavic stuff but there you go.

I forget where I'm going with this as I've had a few cans but if your parents divorce and you suddenly find yourself with a step-sister I think it is if anything a duty to give her a good seeing to. It's like MAD, fuck my mother and I'm pissing up your daughters arse.
>> No. 58993 Ambulancelad
12th November 2017
Sunday 7:15 pm
58993 spacer
>>58989
AROUND 75% OF YOUNG WOMEN FEEL THAT THEY'VE BEEN PRESSURISED INTO performing SEXUAL ACTS DUE TO PORN MAKING THEM SEEM NORMALISED. ANAL, IN PARTICULAR, IS NOW SEEN AS NORMAL AND OTHER ACTS INCLUDE THROAT FUCKING.

HTTP://WWW.IPPR.ORG/READ/YOUNG-PEOPLE-SEX-AND-RELATIONSHIPS-THE-NEW-NORMS

WHEN MOST BOYS ARE REGULARLY VIEWING PORN FROM YEAR 8 ONWARDS IT'S NO SURPRISE THAT IT HAS A MAJOR INFLUENCE ON THEIR PERCEPTIONS AND ATTITUDES TOWARDS SEX.
>> No. 58999 Ambulancelad
12th November 2017
Sunday 11:59 pm
58999 spacer
Porn has a discoverability problem. There's very little in the way of curation, so the success or failure of a scene depends largely on what search keywords it matches.

It's well-known in the industry that there's a hinterland between "teen" and "MILF". A lot of performers in their late twenties struggle to find work, because they don't fit into either category. It's not that women in their late twenties are so grotesque that nobody would masturbate over them, but just because nobody particularly searches for that. There's no conspiracy to normalise incest porn, it's just that the industry found some previously under-served search terms. In a year or two, the industry will have moved on to the next set of search terms.

The prevalence of extreme acts is purely economic. If you want to watch two normal-looking people having normal sex, you can find millions of free amateur videos. People pay for what they can't easily find for free. This isn't a question of greed - the porn industry is huge, but it isn't terribly profitable due to the huge amount of competition.

There's also a demographic skew. Middle-aged white American men are by far the most likely to actually pay for their porn, so the output of the industry is heavily skewed towards their preferences. Women make up a fairly large proportion of porn consumers, but almost never pay for it, so they're massively under-served. It's likely that this has become a vicious cycle - people who don't see their preferences represented in porn are less likely to pay for it, so they see less content that's aimed at them, which they're less likely to pay for.

The current trend in the industry is towards ultra-niche content. Making a video that appeals to an extremely specific demographic can be much more profitable than something with more general interest, because people will actively seek out your content and pay for it. Many independent performers make most of their income from one-to-one cam sessions and personalised videos, because piracy and tube sites can't directly compete with a video that's made for just one person.
>> No. 59000 Crabkiller
13th November 2017
Monday 3:52 am
59000 spacer
>>58991

As you say, they only put 'step' in the titles because incest porn is illegal in many places. Similarly you can't just search for 'raped' or 'forced' on pornhub.
>> No. 59001 Ambulancelad
13th November 2017
Monday 6:50 am
59001 spacer
>>58999
>A LOT OF PERFORMERS IN THEIR LATE TWENTIES STRUGGLE TO FIND WORK, BECAUSE THEY DON'T FIT INTO EITHER CATEGORY

Is that why quite a few of them put on weight to appeal to the chubby/BBW market?
>> No. 59002 Auntiefucker
13th November 2017
Monday 9:19 am
59002 spacer
>>59001

Some of them just let themselves go, but it can be a conscious decision. Getting implants will get you into the "big boobs" category, growing out your body hair will get you into "hairy". If you've got some acting talent then femdom, roleplay and JOI can be good niches.

Personality is what really sustains a performer through the thick and thin. The idea that porn performers have to conform to a specific beauty ideal is a pernicious myth. Someone like Nina Hartley, Larkin Love or Mistress T will never struggle for work, because they're incredibly dynamic in front of the camera. They've broken out of the keyword-driven morass and developed a cult following. A skinny blonde nineteen-year-old can get away with being a boring or unreliable performer, but their career will grind to a halt when the novelty wears off. There's no substitute for genuine enthusiasm and a professional attitude to the industry.

This applies even more so to male performers, with Christian XXX being a shining example. He has performed in nearly 2,400 scenes over a 15 year career, because he's game for anything and has a remarkable talent for coaxing good performances out of his co-stars. In recent years he has become the first-call performer for trans and BBW scenes, but he's done just about everything at some point in his career.
>> No. 59004 Anonymous
13th November 2017
Monday 9:31 pm
59004 spacer

gianna michaels.jpg
590045900459004
>>59002
>PERSONALITY IS WHAT REALLY SUSTAINS A PERFORMER THROUGH THE THICK AND THIN.
The one and only.
>> No. 59005 Searchfag
13th November 2017
Monday 9:54 pm
59005 spacer
>>59004

The GOAT.
>> No. 59006 Ambulancelad
13th November 2017
Monday 10:02 pm
59006 spacer
>>59005
Bestiality is illegal and anyway horses are better.
>> No. 59007 Are Moaty
13th November 2017
Monday 10:04 pm
59007 spacer
>>59002

Your knowledge of porn is impressive. do you work in the industry, or are you just a properly sad wanker?
>> No. 59008 Auntiefucker
14th November 2017
Tuesday 2:11 am
59008 spacer
>>59002

I always thought Mistress T should have chosen a better name though, many search functions won't look for the single "T" at all.
>> No. 59009 Auntiefucker
14th November 2017
Tuesday 7:09 am
59009 spacer
>>59007

Back when I was a struggling postgrad, I did data analytics on the side for a couple of porn companies. I had a whale of a time and I'm often sorely tempted to go back into the industry. The big players are astonishingly sophisticated and have engineering resources that most tech startups would envy. There's a bit of reputational risk, but I'd suggest that anyone in the early stages of a tech career give serious thought to working in the porn industry.

A lot of people don't realise how dominant MindGeek are in the industry. They own PornHub, RedTube, YouPorn and dozens of paysites including Brazzers, Digital Playground and Reality Kings. Every day they get 115 million unique visitors, handle 15TB of uploads and serve 3 billion ad impressions. In addition to their own web properties, they provide hosting, affiliate management, analytics, CDN and CRM services to a vast proportion of the industry - they're basically the AWS of porn.
>> No. 59017 Anonymous
16th November 2017
Thursday 10:04 pm
59017 spacer
>>59006

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IHGaRQIGYG4
>> No. 59018 Searchfag
16th November 2017
Thursday 10:51 pm
59018 spacer
>>59000
>SIMILARLY YOU CAN'T JUST SEARCH FOR 'RAPED' OR 'FORCED' ON PORNHUB.

What's the sugar-coated workaround search term for wanting to watch rape-style videos?
>> No. 59019 Anonymous
16th November 2017
Thursday 11:15 pm
59019 spacer
>>59018

Abused, punished or against (as in against her will) sort of work.

On Xvideos, "d" used to work, as they'd only block out the "rape" in "raped".

I honestly don't search for this stuff that often. I'm worried about my expertise in this field now.
>> No. 59020 R4GE
17th November 2017
Friday 8:29 pm
59020 spacer
>>59009
>whale of a time
What was so good about it?
>> No. 59021 Anonymous
17th November 2017
Friday 9:24 pm
59021 spacer
>>59020

The stigma of porn drives away the dull corporate types, so you're working with a motley crew of smart oddballs. The industry needs first-rate talent but has difficulty recruiting through the usual channels, so they go the extra mile to find capable people from unconventional backgrounds. There are plenty of interesting engineering challenges due to the sheer amount of content and traffic that these sites need to handle. The money isn't great, but the work culture is highly focused and mostly bullshit-free.
>> No. 59022 Ambulancelad
18th November 2017
Saturday 8:16 pm
59022 spacer
>Pornography described as extreme found on the deputy prime minster's computer would have been illegal if it had been discovered just weeks later, it has been claimed.

>The computer was seized in a raid on the deputy PM's office in November 2008 during an inquiry into government leaks. Some images found on the system were said to be so vile that police took advice from the CPS on whether to prosecute.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5094625/Porn-deputy-PM-s-computer-illegal-now.html

What porn became "extreme" in 2009? I'm sure fisting and pissing was more recent than that.
>> No. 59023 Anonymous
18th November 2017
Saturday 8:55 pm
59023 spacer
>>59022

Bestiality and heavy BDSM.
>> No. 59024 Searchfag
18th November 2017
Saturday 8:56 pm
59024 spacer
>>59022

I think that was the 'extreme BDSM' one.
>> No. 59025 Ambulancelad
19th November 2017
Sunday 1:51 am
59025 spacer
I thought 'extreme porn' only became illegal to produce in the UK, not outright illegal to own?
>> No. 59027 Paedofag
19th November 2017
Sunday 10:40 am
59027 spacer
>>59025
You thought wrong. Better clean your drives, pervert.
>> No. 59028 Searchfag
19th November 2017
Sunday 12:40 pm
59028 spacer
>>59025

There are two separate bits of recent legislation.

Section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 prohibits the possession of pornographic material that realistically depicts the following:

>An act threatening a person's life
>An act which results (or is likely to result) in serious injury to a person's anus, breasts or genitals
>An act which involves (or appears to involve) sexual interference with a human corpse
>A person performing (or appearing to perform) an act of intercourse (or oral sex) with an animal (whether dead or alive)

This applies to staged performances by consenting actors - it doesn't matter what actually happened in the scene, just what it appears to depict. The Simon Walsh test case indicates that fisting and urethral sounding are OK as long as they're clearly consensual and non-injurious.

The other legislation is the Audiovisual Media Services Regulations 2014, which brings video-on-demand services under the control of OFCOM. This has no effect on what you're allowed to possess, but it means that any porn site doing business in the UK can only distribute content that would be eligible for a BBFC rating. This is a lot more restrictive, because the BBFC apply fairly strict standards of taste and decency. They prohibit the depiction of dozens of acts including pissing, fisting, facesitting and huge swathes of BDSM activities. They also prohibit any kind of roleplay that might suggest non-consensuality, including incest and ageplay. Enforcement of this legislation has been highly selective, being mainly targeted at LGBT and feminist sites.
>> No. 59029 Anonymous
19th November 2017
Sunday 1:01 pm
59029 spacer
>>59028
>ENFORCEMENT OF THIS LEGISLATION HAS BEEN HIGHLY SELECTIVE, BEING MAINLY TARGETED AT LGBT AND FEMINIST SITES.
So the government has completely taken leave of its senses.
>> No. 59030 Billbob
19th November 2017
Sunday 1:04 pm
59030 spacer
>>59029

The government has delegated moral responsibility to the tabloid press, for the umpteenth bloody time.

The Daily Mail couldn't give a shit if you beat your wife, but if you put on a gimp suit and get fisted by a dominatrix then you're a threat to human decency.
>> No. 59031 Anonymous
19th November 2017
Sunday 1:05 pm
59031 spacer
>>59028
>The Simon Walsh test case indicates that fisting and urethral sounding are OK as long as they're clearly consensual
Doesn't that mean that two copies of the same footage can be both legal and illegal depending on whether or not they cut out the bit where they give consent?
Also, what if it's the person doing the fisting who doesn't give clear consent?
>> No. 59032 Billbob
19th November 2017
Sunday 1:27 pm
59032 spacer
>>59031

That's for an elderly man in a curly wig to decide. Just hope that your freedom doesn't depend on it.
>> No. 59036 R4GE
19th November 2017
Sunday 4:22 pm
59036 spacer

File
removed
Can't they just get around it all by having a bit at the start where both actors go "THIS IS TOTALLY CONsENSUAL, DON'T TRY THIS AT HOME KIDS!" and then it all proceeds as normal? Like how they used to put bits of completely non-sequitur dialogue in every so often so that pornos couldn't be classified as pure smut.
>> No. 59038 Crabkiller
19th November 2017
Sunday 5:37 pm
59038 spacer
>>59036

Not really. The BBFC classification guidelines prohibit:

>material (including dialogue) likely to encourage an interest in sexually abusive activity which may include adults role-playing as non-adults

>the portrayal of sexual activity which involves real or apparent lack of consent. Any form of physical restraint which prevents participants from indicating a withdrawal of consent

>sexual threats, humiliation or abuse which do not form part of a clearly consenting role-playing game. Strong physical or verbal abuse, even if consensual, is unlikely to be acceptable

You can see that these descriptors are quite vague. Everything comes down to the opinion of BBFC examiners, who issue classification based on public consultations. If the average person thinks that something is unacceptable, then it'll usually be refused classification. Clearly stated consent before and after a scene helps a bit, but it's not a silver bullet. For example, non-realistic school uniforms are OK, but any kind of student-teacher roleplay will be refused classification. Anything more than a light spanking is out, as is any bondage beyond your typical Ann Summers stuff. You can't call anyone "daddy".

Most of the UK industry now licenses their material to foreign distributors, who are exempt from the regulations. It causes a lot of inconvenience in terms of payment processing and marketing, but it's only had a significant impact on small independent producers who can't afford good legal advice and the big players with an established presence in traditional media.

http://www.bbfc.co.uk/sites/default/files/attachments/BBFC%20Classification%20Guidelines%202014_5.pdf
>> No. 59039 Ambulancelad
19th November 2017
Sunday 10:15 pm
59039 spacer
>>59036

Remember /iq/ is sfw.
>> No. 59042 YubYub
20th November 2017
Monday 2:27 am
59042 spacer
>>59028
>CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND IMMIGRATION ACT

Is there some significance to the immigration part or is that just how the law organises itself?
>> No. 59043 Crabkiller
20th November 2017
Monday 3:03 am
59043 spacer
>>59042

"Criminal Justice Act" is a standard short title for legislation which affects the criminal law. Governments will often tack something on to the standard short title if there's something in it that they're particularly keen to highlight. We've had a Criminal Justice and Public Order Act, a Criminal Justice and Police Act, a Criminal Justice (militant daft woggery and Conspiracy) Act etc.

Return ]
whiteline

Delete Post []
Password