How did you celebrate protection from porn week?

Is there a difference between being a waiter and other kinds of waitstaff? Or could this just be different because I'm in Minnesota?At any rate, any time I have to pay you to work for you, that's exploitation. I don't care if it keeps the food cheap or whatever, I won't frequent an establishment that's exploiting its employees. (I get the paper from vending machines.)

I am not dismissing that there is beautiful sexual literature (or even movies and still images) which are NOT graphic.The problem is just that you were trying to define "erotica" as seperate from pornography which is not the most common usage. This is NOT to say you are wrong. It is just that the most common usage (especially in studies on porn) is that "erotica" is sexually graphic, but nonviolent porn. "Hardcore" involves violence and coercive elements in the storyline.In this way nongraphic sexual material is just "erotic", but not "erotica".I'd be interested in hearing what you consider Realm of the Senses. It is the most sexually explicit as you can ever get, yet is not really erotic at all. Sex without the sexuality, because it is all analysis of the relatioships tying sex acts together. It is definitely a piece of art. Paying attention and being engaged is different than having emotions and intellectual stimulation while having sex.The very best sex involves everything. But sexual situations involving everything are not necessarily the best, and simple physical pleasure can get pretty damn close to the very best. Or at least the last part of that sentence is true for me and most people I have known. Exactly, and those are the visual elements. And those actors always seem to be dodging bullets too. Heheheh. Have you never heard of stunt cocks, and editing. Perhaps if you watched more porn (and payed close attention) you'd start noticing that some cocks that are cumming don't look like the cock that was just getting pleasured (sometimes the bodies are even changed).You will also note the cutaways to the guy's faces, and then he's jerking as he's coming. A lot of cumshots are done separate and is the guy simply jerking to completion... not the majority, but it is quite often.And women certainly do cum while doing porn. It is not during the uncomfortable parts, but it happens. I guess I simply belong to a different species from you, and same goes for most people I know.Sarcasm alert: Could you explain where all the "pairbonding" is going on at swing parties where married couples have sex with other married couples they will never see again... and how about them gloryholes?Your pairbonding theory is completely limp schraf. Sex may help with it, but pairbonding is not a necessary (or natural) part of sex. If this is all you are talking about then you are right. When you do things that cause pleasure with other people around you, then you have "nice feelings" towards them.But this is a far cry from "pair bonding". That suggests some emotional relationship beyond a person you think is cool and can have fun with. You may notice I said "it appears from your comments". I can say whatever I want about how you are coming off by your commentary. It is the same as you suggesting someone is coming off as a Fundie Xtian by what they have said. I could of course be completely wrong.But why should you care anyway, are you saying you DON'T prefer more complex and layered sexuality than me? You have said before that you wouldn't want to have sex outside of the boundary of relationships and that is all I was saying. Am I wrong?------------------
holmes

crashfrog responds to me:

quote:

---

At any rate, any time I have to pay you to work for you, that's exploitation. I don't care if it keeps the food cheap or whatever, I won't frequent an establishment that's exploiting its employees.

---

Then you're going to be in for a rude awakening. An awful lot of establishments you frequent engage in some form of this exploitation.F'rinstance, I have a cabaret act I've been trying to get together. If I want to put it on in a theatre, I'm going to have to come to a deal with the owners of the space and it will usually be for some sort of percentage as well as some sort of payment up front. I will be paying them to work for them.But that makes a bit of sense, though. The owner of the theatre needs to be able to keep the space running. The up front costs need to be able to cover the basic expenses of electricity, staff, etc. If the show is a flop and doesn't make any money, the owner of the theatre shouldn't have to go out of business. And if the show is a success, there is something to be said about rewarding all who are involved.If I recall correctly, movie theatres and radio stations have similar agreements with the providers of the content.I'd say it becomes exploitative over the details. The amount of money taken by the proprietor, how to deal with underarges, etc.------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

Hi Doc,

quote:

---

LOL! Yes, I agree. However, the point of my post was to illustrate the notion that even though the physicality of the mainstream film is not real, the attempt of the committe making the film is to convey the emotion that such a physicality would carry.

---

I would say you are right for many movies. However, there are some that attempt to portray more realism (wrt violence) such as Reservoir Dogs were one can really suspend ones disbelief during the violence because it looks so realistic. Raging Bull was not realistic violence but more "artistic" violence if this can be thought of a real concept. Much the way Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon was unrealistic but extremely artistic. I think it is easier (for whatever reasons) to portray violence in a number of ways ranging from video game level to completely convincing that is not the case with sex. Mainstream movies are really ham fisted when it comes to portraying realistic sex but in really good movies the sex scenes can be artistic. While I did not particularly like the movie Out of Sight, I did think that the way the scenes were set up and the way the scenes kept flashing backwards and forwards in time was interesting..this also made the sex scene unusual..but not at all realistic (if Clooney were having wild sex with Jennifer Lopez would his hair REALLY stay that perfect?)On the other hand, while porn is physically honest and real, it is emotionally fake. Can anyone really tell if the woman is actually having an orgasm (much less enjoying it at all) or faking it in a porn film?But all guys watch porn for the dialog
I mean who does not shed a tear when watching the wonderful acting of Ron Jeremy?

quote:

---

It's cheap, it's easy, you don't have to invest any intellectual energy when consuming it, and two minutes after it's gone you have forgetten about it.

---

I hate to admit it, but I once watched a porn-film and
fast forwarded the sex to see what happened in the story.The acting wasn't any worse than some 70's Canadian movies
I've seen ...

quote:

---

I have never seen The Godfather and I probably never will. It's a gangster movie. The fact that Corleone doesn't like drugs and is against the machinations of Sollozo to start selling them doesn't alter the fact that Corleone is reprehensible to begin with for being in the mafia

---

The main character of the Godfather filsm is actually Michael
Corleone. His father has made great efforts to shield him
from the criminal side of their 'business' but events overtake
him and he is drawn in.It's a very moralistic tale ... in the same way as most gangster
movies are right back as far as the 30's with James Cagney
dropping dead in a gutter saying 'I ain't so tough', or rolling
dead on the church steps with his crying girl saying 'He
used to be a bigshot', or going yella when he goes to the chair.For a protaganist to be appealing they need some identifiable
humanity.

While I'd agree that the sexiness depicted in magazines
like playboy is targetted at men (funnily enough) in
my experience of such things, it's the female photographers
who take the more sexually exciting photos ... maybe they
just know what men like better than men do?

quote:

---

F'rinstance, I have a cabaret act I've been trying to get together. If I want to put it on in a theatre, I'm going to have to come to a deal with the owners of the space and it will usually be for some sort of percentage as well as some sort of payment up front. I will be paying them to work for them.

---

I'm not sure but that sounds different -- you're paying them to
use their theatre, presumably you would get your cut of the
'door' ?

quote:

---

I would say you are right for many movies. However, there are some that attempt to portray more realism (wrt violence) such as Reservoir Dogs were one can really suspend ones disbelief during the violence because it looks so realistic.

---

You think the violence in Resevoir Dogs is realistic!?!?Quentin Tarantino would disagree -- and has done in several
interviews. Realistic violence is rarely depicted in films ..
the only one I can think of offhand is the fight between
Gregory Peck and Charlton Heston in the Big Country.Spurting bright red blood is not what I would tend to think of
as realistic.

When the cop who is held prisoner gets his ear chopped off..that looked pretty real to me! Also, the amount of blood and obvious pain Tim Roth's character was in as he bled to death from his stomach wounds was at least more realistic than watching an action hero get shot dozens of times, kicked and punched yet still run a marathon and beat the crap out of a couple of hundred people. I think you would bleed a great deal from the wounds sustained by Roth's character.

You don't see the cop's ear removed -- which I suppose does
make it more realistic (panning away is always better than
trying an effect).The bleeding to death effects are as exaggerated as the
'flesh wound' in an action movie -- just in a different way.PS: I don't mean to make a career of diagreeing with you ya know

quote:

---

PS: I don't mean to make a career of diagreeing with you ya know

---

I should hope not..you would have to stand in line with a lot of other people

Right, but how is this a parallel to waitressing?I mean, if you put on a show, somebody's betting on you being a success - you're either fronting your own stake or you have investors. Whether or not you succeed is largely on your own merits - how well you act, how well you advertise, how accurately you gauged your audience.If I'm waitering, I fail or succeed based on the merits of the restaurant's food, how well they advertise, and whether or not I was the first one to get the patrons to their table. It's lame. If the cook is crappy tonight, I'd be out real money.Not to mention that at the theatre, the ticket price is preset and the percentages are worked out, so given a number of patrons you know exactly what cut you'll be getting. Whereas at the restaurant there's no guarantee that any patron will leave a tip - it's entirely up to their benevolence. That's a pretty thin margin, and being expected to pay for the priviledge of living on another's kindness is outrageous.It's a predatory system, just like stripping. There's absolutely no reason that a strip club needs to charge me at the door, and then turn around and charge the strippers, too. It's exploitation when you're hitting them coming and going.Like I said, though, restaurants in MN don't work that way. Either it's not a tipping occasion, like McDonalds or something, or else the waitresses get paid a wage plus tips. In other countries waitstaff don't expect tips, so I assume they're waged as well.[This message has been edited by crashfrog, 11-12-2003]

He's a trained Shakespearian actor, you know.

As far as I know he was just a comedian. I think it was John Dough that was the trained Shakesperian actor.------------------
holmes