this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2025
446 points (98.9% liked)
PC Gaming
11814 readers
674 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
How is being against porn and the porn industry fascism? There are genuine reason to be against porn and it doesn't have anything to do with fascism. Actually if you think that saying that porn is bad is a fascist statement you are actually portraying fascism in a good light and making them look like they are the most reasonable people. Also "you heard", "I heard", those statements mean nothing unless you can prove it.
These "feminists" have connections to TERFs, anti-LGBTQ+ groups, and the same NCOSE, that when it was called Morality in Media, labeled non-sexual representation of interracial couples as "pornography".
If we're at right-wing appropriation of leftist talking points, then you can also let chuds to call black protagonists in video-games the hard-R N-word, and let them harass indie video game devs until they remove said characters, all in the name or "being anti-corporate". Maybe even let big AI corporations to scrape intellectual property and then profit off from it, displacing millions of workers (hopefully only until the hype lasts), because "patent trolls" and "Disney has enough copyrighted material to create their own model" (that argument relies on speculation, that a future model can work off of less data, but still creating good results).
"Porn" is extremely broad. There's plenty of perfectly ethical porn around. Most major producers have pretty strong standards these days. It's not the same industry as it was 10 years ago.
But in this specific case they went after a porn game, not featuring real people. There's basically no real harm here. People occasionally argue that porn addiction is a problem, but that's mostly an addiction problem, which goes for most addictions. The thing addicted too isn't the problem, it's the very nature of being addicted that's causing the issue.
It's fine of course to dislike porn, but to effectively ban people from producing and consuming it is an entirely different matter. That does seem like a massive encroachment on individual rights to me.
I bet they're one of those weirdos that wants to outlaw erotic fanfic too.
Just to make sure, this is the game you are defending and think there is no harm to people being exposed or reinforcing this view of women:
Could you please be realy clear: You don't see any problem with this?
I can think it's a messed up fantasy, but that doesn't mean it should immediately be banned by a payment processor.
Regardless, there are tons of studies showing that consuming this kind of porn actually helps prevent people from acting on these fantasies. The net result is likely less sexual abuse, not more. Because it's fantasy media, it likely is able to keep the fantasy a fantasy, it gives people an outlet.
Show me a meta study that supports this claim, please. Not a single study, but something that looks at those alleged thousands of studies and comes to the conclusion you are implying here.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32691692/
Next sentence
Also:
Also also this study has nothing to do with your claim. Its not about porn preventing violent behaviour, it's about whether porn causes it or not.
This is not contradictory.
The meta-study says that pornography contributing to sexual aggression is not proven. Meaning, it doesn't make it worse.
Meanwhile the population study seems to suggest porn usage reduces sexual aggression, or is at least correlated with it.
The last sentence of the abstract (More studies with improved practices and preregistration would be welcome.) seems to be adressing this. In the study itself they say:
You said, at the start of our dialog, that:
"This kind" refers to violent porn, i suppose? Because the study states that:
So they are not talking about "this kind" of porn.
The meta analysis addresses porn in general. That includes fetishized content like violent or "taboo" pornography. It states there's no evidence that it makes sexual aggression more prevalent, and that population studies show that it's at least correlated with a reduction instead.
We can nitpick the wording all day long, but ultimately I think the takeaway is that there's no evidence that it has negative effects, and there's at least some evidence that suggests it has positive effects.
If anything, this points towards the opposite conclusion. And that is with zero nitpicking.
What even is ethical porn? And what you consider "ethical" is just your subjective opinion.
Porn made with the willing consent of all parties involved, where everyone is compensated appropriately. No harm = no ethical problems as far as I'm concerned. Most big studios these days make sure of this. But there have also been pioneers that push the bar further up (e.g. Lustery, Ersties or Erika Lust).
So if a father and daughter consent is that ethical now?
There is a clear power disparity between a father and a daughter. It's debatable if the daughter could even realistically consent in that case.
But a depiction of it in porn is in my view not inherently unethical. I can disapprove of it personally, but that doesn't mean we should start banning it based on feelings of inappropriateness.
We depict murder and violence in movies and video games too. Actual murder is of course not exactly ethical, but we have no problem accepting it in a movie, because nobody is actually being murdered. You might not like to watch a movie like Saw or something (I personally don't), but it doesn't make the movie itself unethical. To me, porn is no different. There's a clear separation between fiction and reality.
Where imo a line is crossed, is if said media actually makes a clear effort to promote these acts IRL. But that's not the case here.
What if the daughter is in their 20s or 30s? As for depiction, yes there are depiction of violence and murder in movies and games but it is not done in a way that glorify it and most people don't watch it with thirst for murder and violence and they don't get off to it either. The problem with porn is it's made with that in mind, it only exist for people to lust after and get off to it. In many circumstances they are always trying to look for more extreme content because the normal stuff isn't as satisfying anymore. It has been shown to affect the same area of the brain as meth and cocaine. It doesn't cause harm physically but mentally. Sure a thing existing doesn't make it inherently wrong but it more the effect it has on the people consuming the content. It's also why drugs are bad. You could say the drug is just a plant, that it's natural and that there is nothing wrong with that plant existing. But the problem is the effect that plant has on people who consume it. And I am not against you drawing something in private at home or anything, in fact I am strictly against spying and mass surveillance and people should all have privacy in their own home and place they live. So whatever you do on your own time by yourself alone I don't care but the problem comes when that thing gets shared with others and affects them negatively.
We don't have a specific cordoned off section for meth and cocaine in our brains. Many things trigger those areas of the brain, including some pretty innocuous stuff.
Porn isn't physically addictive like meth and cocaine. It can be psychologically addictive though, but that goes for a lot of things out there.
Stuff like meth and cocaine can actually alter your brain, porn does not.
Anyone can develop an unhealthy relationship with porn, but that goes for just about anything out there.
tu quoque
TERFs are evidence in itself, the fact that they exist even all these years
TERFs are anti-porn?
Yes
That makes sense then that women don't want to be sexualized and objectified by porn just so perverts can pleasure themselves to their bodies. All the more reason to be against pornography. Women deserve better.
Yeah, and we all know that women actually don't like sex, they only want romance and children. They're all almost asexual beings unless becoming porn and sex addicts. Meanwhile all men are sex-thirsty animals, that only pretend to be in love, so they can get to the fun part. /s
Oh they do like it but that wasn't my point. My point was that's how they are often treated by others and porn addiction or just watching it plays a big role in that. Just stop watching other people having sex.
Your understanding of porn is hilarious and generalized to the point of being pathetic.
It's the truth though. That's what it does and if you don't see it yourself then you need some help like seriously because it means you are not even aware of it. Rather than watching porn you can do something productive or do something else you enjoy. Or if you have a wife then you know, do it with her. And if you don't then maybe go and find one. It's hard to tell if most people here are addicted or not when they get so triggered when you don't approve of it. It's just not healthy at all mentally, you can look it up there has been plenty of studies done on it and the harmful effects it has on your brain. It has even been compared to cocaine and meth.