|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » Why do you think about porn and wearing.... |
| 1-50 of 68 Posts | Page 1 | 2 | Next Page > |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 10-19-08 02:55pm - 5908 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Cybertoad (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 2,158 Registered: Jan 01, '08 Location: Wash |
Why do you think about porn and wearing.... Is it just me but over the years more and more porn stars are wearing a cross of some kind. I have seen this subject in other forums, but its usually very canned responses. So hey wanted some honest answers if anyone has some , I just wondered. Could be a good topic if everyone is open to saying something about it honestly. My take is one of two, they are possibly Christian religious and do not see this as a sin, as God accept all and this is one example they are saying? or they are stating that they are not a drone in society and God loves them no matter what. Being only modern day ppl associate the cross with Christ, I just wondered what was the take, as its not a true symbol as to have one would violate the law in the bible anyways. So whats your take? Why do porn stars wear crosses and why are we seeing it more in adult porn? Thanks Cybertoad. Since 2007 | |
|
||
| 10-19-08 05:46pm - 5908 days | #2 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
I haven't been paying all that much attention, but for argument sake I will assume that you mean the standard Judeo-Christian cross as oppose to a variation of the Egyptian Ankh sysmbol. If that is the case then I believe it's more a fashion icon then an actual sign of their faith. I don't think Madonna wore a cross through a large part of her career because of her strong Christian belief, because if that were the case I don't believe she would be following this new Kabbalah religion. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 10-19-08 06:02pm - 5908 days | #3 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User  Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
Fashion is definitely a strong possibility, but it may also be due to a religious upbringing and not really very reliant on the model's own religious beliefs. For example, I was raised Roman Catholic, granted rather loosely, but I was enough involved that I went through confirmation. After that ceremony my mother gave me a gold cross necklace to wear around my neck - and while I do not attend church and would proclaim myself Agnostic if asked, I wear the cross necklace (when it isn't broken like now) as it pleases my mother. She cares, so out of respect for her I wear it as much as I can. (Which reminds me... I need to get that damn thing repaired.) At any rate, an amazing amount of people in America say their religion is an important and significant part of their life. I understand it can bring a sense of purpose to people and I would never deny them that comfort as long as they don't insist on imposing their believes on others. I personally have little use for religion. While I won't argue against it as a possibility, following its own definitions it can't be proven or disproven, that makes Atheism as much a religion as any other - I simply find the whole topic rather silly and am happy to dictate my life toward my own goals for happiness, whatever they may be today. That said, it is possible that a number of the models are heavily religious. I would say most of the models come from rather modest backgrounds, which tends to be the strong-hold of religion. With the advent of Gonzo porn, directors are less inclined to require the models to wear on not wear specific items - often they appear in clothing they've purchased themselves for their job - so if they arrive wearing a cross, most directors probably don't care - as long as it doesn't get in the way of the action of course. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 10-19-08 08:24pm - 5908 days | #4 | |
|
RagingBuddhist (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 893 Registered: Jan 23, '07 |
Seems I have some radical ideas about anything involving religion. So, I'm playing it safe and not jumping in with both feet on this one because it might get ugly. But I do want to chime in with the fact that a cross is in no way related to Judaism. It's a symbol for Christianity. Sarcasm is a body's natural defense against stupidity. | |
|
||
| 10-19-08 08:41pm - 5908 days | #5 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
Aww, jeez - now I'm all curious :-D While I don't use religion in my own life, it can certainly be a good source of entertainment (amongst many, many other things) - so feel free to share, I think if things were going to get ugly on these message boards, it would have happened long ago. As for the Judeo-Christian comment, that term does mean the interplay of concepts and values commonly held by both Judaism and Christianity - so yes, the cross is usually associated solely with Christianity, but as pat362 pointed out, the symbol itself is far, far older than that. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 10-19-08 10:33pm - 5908 days | #6 | |
|
Cybertoad (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,158 Registered: Jan 01, '08 Location: Wash |
Actually, its a modern symbol for Christianity, it was not until the 1300 that it was truly regarded in this way. Christ was a Jew lol not a Christian , I am glad there are open minds cant see it getting ugly if we are honest right? Since 2007 | |
|
||
| 10-20-08 11:55am - 5907 days | #7 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User  Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
I've had the same question both with the cross and the Star of David dangling from a babe's neck as she's doing the nasty. I've thought it more as a personal thing where the babe: 1. Is thinking that it can't hurt to wear it, especially if she gets religious later in life. 2. Is wearing it as a fashion statement, not as a symbol of her faith. 3. Is wearing it as her last hope for eventual salvation. 4. Is wearing it to show her parents that she still retains a small part of her moral upbringing in case she is ever outed. In this day and age of secularism and the prohibition of anything even suggesting religion in the "public square," I wouldn't be at all surprised if someone submits legislation prohibiting the wearing of any religious symbols in any entertainment activity (porn, movies, TV, stage, etc.) | |
|
||
| 10-20-08 06:29pm - 5907 days | #8 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
I think many wear the cross because it is one of the most common fashion accessories found in the Western World. In this secular age I doubt if it has a deeper meaning for most. For some it could be a symbol that God loves them just as they are and I don't find that hard to believe since, in my mind and conscience, violence in general and unjustified wars in particular are far greater sins than porn. Might be self-justification on my part but I don't think so. For some it might exhibit their love for God. They have somehow managed to reconcile what they are doing with their God and his laws. | |
|
||
| 10-20-08 06:57pm - 5907 days | #9 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
As Toadsith said the cross and variation of it precede Christianity by many many years. In fact Christians don't actually worship crosses but instead worship a crucufix, which is a cross with the depiction of Jesus on it. Now you can argue, if you want that most of todays crosses are the domain of Christians. I could be wrong on this one, but as far as I know all Christians are in fact Judeo-Christians because we all read the New Testament and the old Testament, and there are no Christians in the old testament. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 10-20-08 07:08pm - 5907 days | #10 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
I believe RagingBuddhist is technically correct if you say "crucifix" instead of "cross". He did say "cross", which as you pointed out is a more abstract term, but the "crucifix" is exclusively Christian, and the term Judeo-Christian is defined by Merriam-Websters as such: "having historical roots in both Judaism and Christianity" and perhaps even better defined by Wikipedia as such: "...a term used to describe the body of concepts and values which are thought to be held in common by Judaism and Christianity, and considered, often along with classical Greco-Roman civilization, a fundamental basis for Western legal codes and moral values. In particular, the term refers to the common Old Testament/Tanakh as a basis of both moral traditions, including particularly the Ten Commandments; and implies a common set of values present in the modern Western World." While Judaism and Christianity both share the Old Testament/Tanakh, that writing doesn't have any interest in the Crucifix. Now I would say that most basic crosses, not crucifixes, can be correctly assumed to be of Christian origin these days, but most people don't know how much so many of the world's religions overlap. Symbols and traditions have been interchanged amongst so many religions that much of it is rather blurred. I must say that I do miss the crazy old days of Polytheism - those religions produced some great yarns! "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 10-20-08 08:03pm - 5907 days | #11 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
I gotta say that I would never have expected in a thousand millenia (that means a million years) that I would run into a serious and nuanced discussion of comparative religious symbolism on a Porn Users forum. Next up, a conceptual comparative analysis of the impact of the Pythagorean Theorem on Einstein's development of his Theory of Relativity (while watching Carmella Bing whacking Lee Stone's schlong with her fabulous rack). ;o) | |
|
||
| 10-21-08 08:30am - 5906 days | #12 | |
|
Cybertoad (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,158 Registered: Jan 01, '08 Location: Wash |
I knew when posting it , that I was steping on the edge, but thats always been me. But I am impressed as so should all that we have a very high class viewer here as they looked at it from very intersting perspectives. Whats sad is try posting this on a Christain website and they will blast you for even saying anything, which is weird in its own right as wouldnt you think they would want to know more not censor? Since 2007 | |
|
||
| 10-21-08 08:52am - 5906 days | #13 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
| |
|
||
| 10-21-08 09:26am - 5906 days | #14 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
I deny tolerance. Acceptance or nothing at all. Tolerance speaks of a group of people needing the approval of another. You never tolerate equals. I admit I do tolerate some things. Like deer and pigeons - I'm not willing to expend the energy necessary to exterminate them from my areas of frequent travel, so I tolerate them. "We tolerate you" simply states that we hate you but can't get rid of you within our current constraints. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 10-21-08 09:46am - 5906 days | #15 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
HaHa, a strong statement uttered with the conviction of the young. Tolerance also means recognizing that there are differences in tastes, customs, cultures, morals etc., acknowledging that fact and learning to live with it rather than start wars in a forum, the neighborhood, country or abroad. Not very elegantly put but you know what I mean! :-) | |
|
||
| 10-21-08 10:54am - 5906 days | #16 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
Acceptance of a culture doesn't dictate that one must be of that culture or in anyway involved with that culture. Tolerance is often an indicator that that which is to be tolerated is at minimum a distraction and at maximum a threat. Merriam-Webster describes "tolerate" as such (when not referring to a drug or food): "2 a : to allow to be or to be done without prohibition, hindrance, or contradiction b : to put up with <learn to tolerate one another>" Assuming all groups of humans to be equal to all other groups of humans, it is wrong to tolerate (some will regard this as a massive assumption, but it is crucial to the argument and rather core to most of western culture). You can either accept a culture or try to change that culture until you can accept it. For example, many people speak of tolerance in regards to the hot topic of the multitude of Islamic cultures. Most of the cultures in question have doctrines of non-violence and peace. Any different culture can be strange and confusing, but despite the strangeness of many aspects of the culture, they should be free to worship their religion and be welcomed in our neighborhoods and places of commerce. However, there are some extreme segments of the Islamic community that regularly beat their women - these segments obviously should not be accepted, but more to the point, not tolerated. Not tolerating something doesn't necessarily dictate that you immediately turn to deadly force, but you do something. Provide places of sanctuary for the abused, collect evidence and attempt to prosecute the abuser, et cetera. Tolerance could easily be seen as condoning the abuse in that scenario. Tolerance is never a useful behavior - it is a form of limbo, dictating that the status quo is not acceptable by the tolerating party, but they are not willing to get involved for whatever reason. Tolerance perhaps is a great tool of those capable of doublethink - described as "The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them." (George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four) For to tolerate you can both think well of yourself for staying out of other people's affairs while at the same time loathing the behavior of those very same people. I fear that popular media has muddled the distinction between "acceptance" and "tolerance". Open-minded and accepting people have come to use the phrase tolerance without realizing what they really are saying. Oh why can't we teach our children how to speak? ("The French never care what they do, actually, as long as they pronounce it properly.") So while I will not argue that it is a strong statement and nor can I argue that I'm young - a condition which I work on every day and am happy to report much progress with - I must stand and say with conviction that tolerance is not acceptable. People say you can't argue opinion only facts, but I beg to differ. Opinions are all that there is to be argue, a fact, by definition, is irrefutable. So one argues against another's opinion of what is or is not fact - but why stop there? I contend that we the people are letting definitions slip away - do you realize how often I get asked to be more specific when I ask for a couple of tacos (or any other product)? I can rephrase it, but I simply can't get any more specific - a couple is two, plain and simple. It has been said that the English language has become such a dominating language due to it expanding and absorbing terminology - I have no objection to new words, I am simply saddened that people are forgetting the definitions of older words. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 10-21-08 01:06pm - 5906 days | #17 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
IMHO depends on what you're comparing it to. If choosing between tolerance and intolerance (such as in 1572), I definitely prefer tolerance. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 10-21-08 01:32pm - 5906 days | #18 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
Honestly, I don't really understand the reason for such a question in PU forum; IMHO it would look ok in a forum of religious zealots, but here... Why everybody (even porn users) implies that adult models cannot honestly believe in something? Why a cross on an adult model is considered something "strange", but nobody will question a cross on a medieval executioner or Enron CEO? Why adult models always considered as "second-class" people even by those who enjoys them a lot (like people on PU)? Granted, most of them don't really believe, but so as millions of the other people wearing cross, so what's the big difference? Or the difference lies only in the position of official churches? But isn't belief is about something inside us, NOT about something mechanically accepted from the outside? Weren't there already WAY TOO MANY cases when mechanically accepted beliefs have lead to massacres of the people with different ones? Personally I'm trying to respect (referring to Toadsith - it's a bit more than just "tolerate") any belief, as long as it's person's own and not just "because somebody told me so" (even if it is Pope); this equally covers beliefs "porn is wrong" and adult models consciously wearing cross. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" Edited on Oct 21, 2008, 01:38pm | |
|
||
| 10-21-08 01:51pm - 5906 days | #19 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
That would be a situation of "the lesser of two evils", or more accurately, as tolerance isn't really an evil, it is simply inaction. Nothing gained, nothing lost. It can be preferable to intolerance in some instances not in others. In some regards, at least intolerance is action - and action sparks reaction. If the action isn't what you want, maybe the reaction will be. It would at least be a change. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 10-21-08 02:12pm - 5906 days | #20 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
IF there is somebody left to react. Also I don't think that Huguenots in 1572 would share your opinion - at that point they didn't want reaction, all that they needed was a bit of tolerance to let them live and pray the way they preferred. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 10-21-08 02:21pm - 5906 days | #21 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
As Porn Users is about porn in general, I think this is a perfectly reasonable topic. If you are watching a porn scene and model has a cross prominently displayed on her person, one will invariably take notice. I myself have also noticed the rise of religious paraphernalia displayed by models in porn scenes. Granted I wasn't interested enough to start a forum thread, but since it is a topic directly related to watching porn, I see it in no way out of place. I also wanted to point out that you asked why "everybody (even porn users" imply that adult models cannot honestly believe in something and then off-handedly stated that "most of them don't really believe". Of all us that replied, only one person didn't explicitly state that the models may fully believe in the faith they are displaying on their person. So by this small sampling, I don't think it is fair to say everybody implies the models can't have a religious faith. I also have found very little evidence that any of the regular contributors think of the models as "second class" citizens - most of us are big fans and would go "oh! oh! Isn't that so-and-so?" if we saw them on the street. Just because we wouldn't necessarily choose their lifestyle had we the choice, doesn't mean we respect them any less. I also would not choose the lifestyle of an Olympic athlete - I still respect them greatly for their accomplishments. As for faith, I would honestly question the faith of an Enron CEO - I generally believe most high level CEOs to be sociopaths, that is how they can rationally make the hard decisions required for the job, and while religion is extremely logical, it isn't wildly rational. Still, people like to say belief is about what is inside us, but in general it is relying on instructions outside of us to live our life by. People can get great personal comfort from the structure of a religious belief system, but it is hardly an internal affair. Rarely are beliefs a person's own - they are passed on from person to the another via our multitudes of communication. This is highly evident in persons with mental illness, you can see the number of living Messiahs, Alien Abductees, et cetera - rise and fall based on what large stories are covered in the mainstream media. Generally this would be monitoring of Paranoid Schizophrenics - these people are getting tons of internal stimuli, but even that is tainted by external stimuli. To have a truly unique and independent religious belief system, you'd need a Helen Keller type. Of course people modify their religious beliefs internally, but belief in general remains an external structure for both thought and behavior - largely what makes it such a powerful force for control of a populace. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 10-21-08 02:24pm - 5906 days | #22 | |
|
messmer (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,582 Registered: Sep 12, '07 Location: Canada |
Toadsith, very eloquently reasoned and I am forced to agree with most of what you wrote even though I originally thought that, with the enthusiasm of youth, you threw the baby out with the bath water. See your: "I deny tolerance. Acceptance or nothing at all. Tolerance speaks of a group of people needing the approval of another." :-) The statement seemed too absolute to me .. but reading carefully your second post I am starting to understand what you meant. Communication isn't always easy, is it? | |
|
||
| 10-21-08 02:33pm - 5906 days | #23 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
That is a very specific scenario and while the action that was chosen may not have helped the situation, it doesn't dispute the point that tolerance is inaction and as I said before, rather useless. I describe it as useless because it does not spark any form of change in the population deciding upon tolerance over other options. I still agree with Issac Asimov's character Salvor Hardin in "Foundation" who had a plaque on his office wall stating: "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." Sometimes a society's leaders are incompetent for the situation they are placed in and they have to resort to violence. Tolerance can be an alternative, but I feel generally the society is overlooking other and better alternatives when they are choosing tolerance. There is always more than one choice - even if you have to cheat to make it happen, the Kobayashi Maru is an excellent example of that. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 10-21-08 02:44pm - 5906 days | #24 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
Communication is a skill I doubt I'll ever master - but I fear I keep trying. I must admit that I largely began writing that "I deny tolerance" bit in a thinly veiled reference to Gregory Corso's poem "Marriage", which I was reading recently as a close friend of mine is getting married soon. So I probably came on a little stronger than necessary, but I found it amusing at the time. As you said though: communication isn't always easy - so I fear there were more nuances being broadcast in that piece than I had originally intended. None-the-less, I always like people to call me out on my arguments if I'm not making sense (or for any other reason), as I believe it improves my writing as well as my thinking. Of course, I'd never rule out throwing out the baby with the bath water, to paraphrase Leonard Cohen, I don't like children anyhow. Which reminds me, I never did finish that post in that thread about pregnant models... a brain like a sieve... "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo Edited on Oct 21, 2008, 07:37pm (Toadsith: URL Typo.) | |
|
||
| 10-21-08 06:48pm - 5906 days | #25 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User  Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 02:07pm | |
|
||
| 10-21-08 07:21pm - 5906 days | #26 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
I'm take my hat off to you sir on the eloquence of your statements. I would had that if Einstein had seen Carmellas boobs in motion he would gladly have voluntered to show her his theories on the Big Bang. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 10-21-08 10:44pm - 5906 days | #27 | |
|
Cybertoad (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,158 Registered: Jan 01, '08 Location: Wash |
Now this is amazing , wouldnt youy just love to send this to congress. They have no clue about some of this stuff. They just have to bulk eveything and have no idea that we are ALL different. To be fair, when Toadsmith also used the phrase "religious paraphernalia" He is correct everything from Tebetin prayers to jewish stars are scene . I focused on the Cross due to my background and the fact its a well known paraphernalia, that most associate with religious values of some sort. Awsome postings and opened minds very cool. Since 2007 | |
|
||
| 10-22-08 09:40am - 5905 days | #28 | ||
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
While I would like to think that you're right, I'm not really sure so. I'm really sure that OUTSIDE of PU it's VERY common to think of models as of "second class" people; here it was definitely milder but I'm still not convinced that all (or even most) PU members share your point of view. I will think if I can come up with a poll to figure it out.
I think you're making a mistake of mixing up "religion" with "belief" here (first is indeed external, but the second one is essentially a kind of thought or feeling, which are internal by definition), but I doubt it's the right forum to discuss this kind of things :-). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" Edited on Oct 22, 2008, 09:43am | ||
|
|||
| 10-22-08 09:42am - 5905 days | #29 | ||
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
Right.
Wrong :-). I will argue that inaction can be useful (VERY often when compared to certain actions which are worse than doing nothing, and sometimes even when comparing to ALL possible actions). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | ||
|
|||
| 10-22-08 11:54am - 5905 days | #30 | |
|
Cybertoad (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,158 Registered: Jan 01, '08 Location: Wash |
Hmmm Id have to say this is about the best place to discuss what ppl think about porn and anything that is associated with it. I thought when i posted this, what if I said what do you think about nipple rings , or even better yet about Middle East porn sites where you have whole cultures that basically would see them as as blasphemy to have middle east girls in a porn site or have it be about just that. There are many sites that are like that some listed even on PU. So imagine a Muslim point of view ? Would be no open thought at all. My point is by posting here, I get straight answer, no one will stick judgment into their answers so you get clean unadulterated responses. If I posted this anywhere else the first freaking thing would be SIN! And I am willing to bet 70% of the ppl that would read this post elsewhere probably view porn in a dark basement and are ashamed of it so I do not want answers from those kinds of ppl that cant be honest. At least here its open to be discussed. I guess in closing if not posting about what porn stars wear in a adult porn forum where else could you post it and get honest answers ? Not just answers you do or don't want to hear. Cybertoad. Since 2007 | |
|
||
| 10-22-08 12:21pm - 5905 days | #31 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
If you are talking about belief strictly by itself, the primary definition is an internal affair: a state or habit of mind in which trust or confidence is placed in some person or thing - Merriam Webster In my previous statements I had assumed, perhaps wrongly, that you were talking more specifically of religious belief, which falls more along the lines of the secondary definition of belief: something believed ; especially : a tenet or body of tenets held by a group - Merriam Webster If religious beliefs are a tenet or body of tenets held by a group, that brings the external influence back into play. Even with the primary definition of belief, it talks of trust or confidence in something external to the believer. For example, I believe in the consistent influence of gravity in my everyday life. It would be wildly impractical for me to have to check that things fall toward the ground every time that force is involved with my daily activities. By believing in the constant of presence of gravitational acceleration, I need not waste my day checking on it before proceeding with an action. I will grant you that a sole individual can develop a large group of beliefs in that nature without the interaction of other humans - but a vast bulk of beliefs, religious or not, from the extreme to the mundane, are passed from human to human by various methods. So I would maintain beliefs are still largely shaped by external though they are the states of the internal. In general, it is a frustratingly vague topic that can be argued many ways with various ranges of success - one of the reasons why psychology frequently gets nailed with the label of "pseudo science". Behavioral Psychology, that is an interesting subset that I like - cleanly documented experiments with repeatable results, and fascinating to boot. As for the topic of porn models seen as "second class citizens" - I do want to note that I said "regular contributers", not most and particularly not all Porn Users. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 10-22-08 12:33pm - 5905 days | #32 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
I'm curious, what examples are there of inaction being useful as a tool for change of a social paradigm? Certainly Gandhi is not an example - he was non-violent, certainly, but he was hardly a proponent of inaction - he was an expert showman and negotiator. I will grant you that inaction in some instances may not cause harm, but I can't think of any instance of inaction changing social patterns. I am especially curious about example of all possible actions in a group social situation being worse than inaction. My automatic response to scenarios like that is simply that those claiming that all possible actions are bad simply have not found all of the possible actions yet - I do not believe in a no-win scenario in a real world environment. I understand that the odds can be stacked heavily against a win, but there is always something that can done to improve the odds, even if it is just a smidgen. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 10-22-08 12:35pm - 5905 days | #33 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 02:07pm | |
|
||
| 10-22-08 12:41pm - 5905 days | #34 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
Those two sentences right there quite thoroughly sum up both why I am sometimes absent from the forum for sizable lengths of time and why I like to have topics like this welcome in the forum. As they say: "Well said, good man, well said." "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 10-22-08 12:58pm - 5905 days | #35 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 02:08pm | |
|
||
| 10-22-08 01:11pm - 5905 days | #36 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
Agreed, many games have inaction as a useful strategy - it is as the scenario approaches the sheer complexity of real world social interaction where it becomes less and less of a useful option. Of course, another point due to the complexity of these systems is that one could argue that inaction, in reality, is a feasible impossibility. Since minute actions can set off changes of immense proportions (i.e. the old "if a butterfly flaps its wings" concept) and add to that that humans alone are nearly incapable of perfect repetition of behavior (despite being capable of coming extraordinarily close to perfection given enough practice) - perhaps I should not label Tolerance as inaction and instead label it a useless action in real world social interaction scenarios. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 10-22-08 03:44pm - 5905 days | #37 | ||
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
Don't you think that this discussion has already went past the point of discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? I can easily find several dozens of different definitions (on beliefs it's really easy, believe me :-) ), but what will it change?
So? It doesn't contradict in any way to my point that it is a PERSON him/herself who makes a decision to believe, NOT somebody else. Sure, nobody can live in a vacuum, but from exactly the same input different people make completely different beliefs, and this difference can be attributed ONLY to "something" within. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | ||
|
|||
| 10-22-08 03:50pm - 5905 days | #38 | |
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
Wait, where I told anything about "change of social paradigm"? I could check Merriam-Webster for definition of word "useful", but for some reason I doubt it necessarily implies "social paradigm" :-). In specific situations inaction is definitely useful for specific people or groups of people, that's good enough. Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |
|
||
| 10-22-08 04:09pm - 5905 days | #39 | ||
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
Earlier you stated you thought I was mixing up "religion" and "belief". By locating official definitions of the word "belief" I was attempting to clarify the meaning of the word so no more notions of "mixing up" would occur. There may be many definitions of "belief" - I was simply choosing an authoritative source as a place to start. I feel the source of the definition used at the argument's core does indeed change the strength of the argument. I could just as easily base my arguments off the rantings of Beeble, the local schizophrenic bum, however - I don't think any statements stemming from that source would be regarded with much weight by the community at large, and rightly so I might add.
Aside from the fact that exactly the same input for two individuals would be very difficult to provide, it is important to note that different people only might make completely different beliefs from that input. Talking to individuals from a small congregation will quickly illustrate how similar beliefs can be. Humans are innately social creatures and ignoring that will make understanding how they behave much more difficult. Their interaction makes them in many ways as much as their DNA builds them. The beliefs formed by an individual may be an internalized state, but attributing at as "ONLY to 'something' within" ignores so much of the origins of that belief. As belief is an idea, a state of the mind, a way of thinking, it isn't a finite and tangible object that can be examined by itself. Its history, its origins are as much a part of it as a description of its current state is. Its origins are generally, in all ways, external - sometimes one source but usually many sources. What makes humans change may be how we each assemble ideas slightly differently, but assembled they are. It is what spurned Issac Newton to famously say: "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants." "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | ||
|
|||
| 10-22-08 04:11pm - 5905 days | #40 | ||
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
Definitions, definitions... What shall we use to decide on them - Merriam-Webster, Wikipedia or answers.org? Anyway, what's rather obvious (at least to me) is that there are two DIFFERENT things - one is "external" (whatever the name is, I prefer "religion"), another is "internal", which is indeed usually influenced by "external", but it is still usually at least somewhat different for various reasons (and for this one I prefer the term "belief"); as long as we agree there are these two SEPARATE things, I don't care how to name them :-).
I don't think so. I think that in every case it's different and depends on THEIR thoughts and motives (at least to distinguish "fashion statement" and "sincere way"). And what will be the official position of the official church, I couldn't care less (it's my own personal belief, you know :-) ). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | ||
|
|||
| 10-22-08 04:20pm - 5905 days | #41 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
No problem, I'll save you the effort. 1: capable of being put to use ; especially : serviceable for an end or purpose <useful tools> 2: of a valuable or productive kind <do something useful with your life> - Merriam Webster The sentence is asking for specific examples of inaction, as in lack of the bringing about of an alteration by force or through a natural agency, being capable of being put to use as a tool or method for change of a social paradigm. You see the social paradigm is that which the inaction would be working upon - and the sentence is asking for examples of inaction successfully modifying it. So no, useful has no direct implication of dealing with social paradigm - it is a very versatile word that way. I'm not trying to copy Katie Couric, so I'll happily belabor the point and ask again: What are some specific examples of inaction being used as a method of change in a social paradigm? "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 10-22-08 04:25pm - 5905 days | #42 | |||
|
asmith12 (0)
Active User Posts: 79 Registered: Oct 17, '07 |
Merriam-Webster as an "authoritative source", especially on religious or philosophical issues? Gimme a break. See also my reply to Wittyguy - as I know how pointless any discussion about terminology is (especially in this field - I've referred to angels on the head of a pin on purpose), there I've described CONCEPTS opposed to TERMS, and as long we agree on CONCEPTS, I don't care much about TERMS (and yes, your mix-up was about CONCEPTS).
Only if you're not going to dig deep enough, only in this case. Sure, if you will ask people in church "Do you believe in Jesus?" the answer will likely be the same, but even on question of abortions you're likely to find some difference, and the deeper you will get, the deeper the differences you will find.
Unconvincing :-). Even if we accept that origins are external (which is BTW also disputable in most of religions), even in this case it doesn't provide any argument that "something" (as an example, decision to choose one religion over the other) is an internal one (unless you're going to say that all the world is completely deterministic, but it would be quite difficult even from completely materialistic positions). Motto: "All niches except for boring one!" | |||
|
||||
| 10-22-08 04:54pm - 5905 days | #43 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 02:08pm | |
|
||
| 10-22-08 04:58pm - 5905 days | #44 | |||
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
Merriam Webster tends to be a great choice for describing how the populace currently defines a specific "term" as you put it. I would contend that they are generally regarded as a rather authoritative source for definitions of various terminologies. If you would prefer, I have a copy of the unabridged version near me, though the definitions provided by that book can become a bit cumbersome quickly. Still, since you profess dissatisfaction with the source material, please feel free to provide alternatives. But onward to Terms & Concepts: You wish us to dismiss the terms and agree upon the concepts, a noble wish indeed. The problem is describing the concept properly - which leads us back to the terms, as they are used to describe the concept. So they themselves must be described accurately as well. In a sense, this could go on forever. As for my confusion, it was explained earlier but appears to have been overlooked. I was not confused about the difference of the underlying concept of religion versus the concept of general belief, it turns out that I was simply confused by your statement, which I had interpreted as using the term belief loosely rather than strictly.
As I said, similar, not identical. You will indeed find differences, but the overwhelming similarities, even as the interview progresses, is rather telling of how dependent beliefs are upon the input an individual receives.
Please do dispute - for in my knowledge of religion, it is a wonderful descriptor of the culture that follows it. Their technology, history, art, music, everything is visible in a culture's religion - and once a religion is dominate in a culture it both molds the culture and is molded by the culture. However I would contend that similarities of new religions to old religions, even monotheistic versus polytheistic, shows their origins are hardly internal. Anyway, I'm confused by this sentence, once the parenthetical statements are removed: "Even if we accept that origins are external, even in this case it doesn't provide any argument that "something" is an internal one" "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |||
|
||||
| 10-22-08 05:10pm - 5905 days | #45 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
By the way, as a general note, I do want to thank everybody so far for their input - I do find this all quite enjoyable and do hope none of it has offended anybody. I must point out a character trait of mine (some might label it a flaw) is that while my opinion differs from the opinion of others, I am always happy to argue indefinitely. If you succeed in making me agree with your opinion I will try to stop and not start playing the "Devil's Advocate"... which I've also been known to do. At any rate, no hard feelings I hope, and specific thanks for what so far has been an enjoyable and spirited argument to asmith12, messmer, Wittyguy and everybody else that has as participated thus far. Pardon my brief interruption - let us continue! "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 10-22-08 06:12pm - 5905 days | #46 | |
|
Wittyguy (0)
Active User Posts: 1,138 Registered: Feb 04, '08 Location: Left Coast, USA |
x Edited on Apr 19, 2023, 02:08pm | |
|
||
| 10-22-08 06:55pm - 5905 days | #47 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
I'd like to thank Cybertoad for an amazing subject. It's true that it can get boring talking about boobs and butts all the time. It's strange that through out the entire discussion no one has brought out the fact that pornstars have been using the name of the Lord/God far more times than they have worn somekind of religious artifact. The Oh God (insert phrase)is utered all the time in porn. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 10-22-08 07:02pm - 5905 days | #48 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
Wittyguy has done a fine job of bringing the discussion back to the original topic of the thread - which I must admit was easy to lose site of in much of the previous commentary. I generally agree with the summarization of my opinion on the topics at hand. The thought exercise near the end about the wearing of religious jewelry while performing acts of sin cause for excommunication reminds me of a scenario the Roman Catholic church used in teaching of children years ago. I ran across it specifically from my Mother whom was taught it by Nuns when she was in Catholic school. The scenario is this: You are imprisoned by a group of people that worship a false idol. They give you two options, worship their idol or be slaughtered before it. The church's stance was that you refuse to cooperate and be slaughtered. My mother, being a rather rational person, explained that she felt the best choice was to pretend to worship the idol while secretly worship her God - so as to live to fight another day. As I recall she got a smack across the knuckles for that one. Interestingly, she still considers herself to be a good Roman Catholic despite significant deviation from the dogma of the Church. She knows the Church's stances relatively well, she simply doesn't agree with all of their interpretation of the scriptures. I would say this example is a decent illustration of the blurred lines Wittyguy was discussing. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo Edited on Oct 22, 2008, 07:09pm (Toadsith: Grammar.) | |
|
||
| 10-22-08 07:06pm - 5905 days | #49 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
Very true! And would that be considered taking God's name in vain? It was once pointed out that in America, with its impressive attachment to religion, politicians have to talk about their faith and ask for the blessing of God more than almost any politicians elsewhere - even Italian politicians mere feet away from the Vatican. (Sadly I cannot remember who originally made this observation.) "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 10-22-08 11:00pm - 5905 days | #50 | |
|
Cybertoad (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,158 Registered: Jan 01, '08 Location: Wash |
And to reiterates, one of my original thoughts This is indeed a good place to discuss any adult content regarding porn, I loved the input truly awesome thanks everyone. Since 2007 | |
|
||
| 1-50 of 68 Posts | Page 1 | 2 | Next Page > |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
