UKFF Porn and General Filth Discussion

[Chris B]

ignore
 

Edited February 26, 2021 by Chris B

[Chris B]

21 minutes ago, RancidPunx said:

So I’m a bad person because i cant understand why people pay money for Porn when there is more or less an identical product that is widely and freely available ?

 

I ‘ve never cast aspersions or judgement on the character of those that do...

It's not about casting aspersions on the character of the people. It's about suggesting their work isn't worthy of payment.

I have some friends who are sex workers. Some of them put work out online (including a virtual strip club, run by strippers who have nowhere to work during the pandemic, and a sex writer who produces audio porn). All of them are basically independent producers of their own work. 

To an extent, it's not so much your points as some of the ambiguities and things you might be implying. There's a sense of 'Well, if I want to see her get fucked, I can see a video of her getting fucked, so what's the point in her doing anything else?'. Which is pretty reductive.

But also, would you say it about other things? If you can listen to an album on Youtube for free, is there any point in supporting the artist? If you like a wrestler, but you can see them wrestle online, is there any point in buying a show they're on or going to see them live? In a lot of those cases, we support the artists that we like. What you're coming across as saying is that they're not worth supporting. And plenty of people think that they are, and that their work is worth it. 

The porn industry has been, historically, pretty shitty, and the money generally hasn't gone mainly to the performers. Only Fans, and other similar things, are up-ending that, allowing the money to go directly to people who produce the things they want to. It's not a perfect platform either, but there's a reason so many content producers are flocking to it.

(Going to admit, I really don't see why it's a scam either.)

 

Edited February 26, 2021 by Chris B

[RancidPunx]

Just now, Chris B said:

It's not about casting aspersions on the character of the people. It's about suggesting their work isn't worthy of payment.

I have some friends who are sex workers. Some of them put work out online (including a virtual strip club, run by strippers who have nowhere to work during the pandemic, and a sex writer who produces audio porn). All of them are basically independent producers of their own work. 

To an extent, it's not so much your points as some of the ambiguities and things you might be implying. There's a sense of 'Well, if I want to see her get fucked, I can see a video of her getting fucked, so what's the point in her doing anything else?'. Which is pretty reductive.

But also, would you say it about other things? If you can listen to an album on Youtube for free, is there any point in supporting the artist? If you like a wrestler, but you can see them wrestle online, is there any point in buying a show they're on or going to see them live? In a lot of those cases, we support the artists that we like. What you're coming across as saying is that they're not worth supporting. And plenty of people think that they are, and that their work is worth it. 

The porn industry has been, historically, pretty shitty, and the money generally hasn't gone mainly to the performers. Only Fans, and other similar things, are up-ending that, allowing the money to go directly to people who produce the things they want to.

(Going to admit, I really don't see why it's a scam either.)

 

Chris B,

Thats fair , rational and points i hadn't considered.

Thanks for taking the time to explain. 
 

 

[Chris B]

ignore
 

Edited February 26, 2021 by Chris B

[Chris B]

Sorry, nothing was showing that it had posted. It looked like the button was broken. 

I mean, it was a good point, but probably not worth making so many times.

[Keith Houchen]

Chris B gangbanging with that post there. 

[Chris B]

1 minute ago, Keith Houchen said:

Chris B gangbanging with that post there. 

I'm a one-man post bukkake.

[Retro Red]

10 minutes ago, Chris B said:

 post bukkake.

Amazon really will ship anything these days.

[SuperBacon]

17 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

Chris B gangbanging with that post there. 

Wait...DP=Double Post???? I've been watching the wrong shit.

[Just Some Guy]

1 hour ago, Thunderplex said:

It was a guy called Phil Sutcliffe who I hear was a bit of a scum ball and abuser.

His cousin was a certain Peter Sutcliffe. Yes, that Peter Sutcliffe.

One hell of a family!

[DEF]

44 minutes ago, Chris B said:

But also, would you say it about other things? If you can listen to an album on Youtube for free, is there any point in supporting the artist? If you like a wrestler, but you can see them wrestle online, is there any point in buying a show they're on or going to see them live? In a lot of those cases, we support the artists that we like. What you're coming across as saying is that they're not worth supporting. And plenty of people think that they are, and that their work is worth it. 

This drives me nuts about society in general. The amount of people that give me shit or at the very least seem bothered by the fact I actually pay for things I value is really troubling.

But in my experience there is a ridiculous amount of people that wouldn't spend money on any or most of the things you listed there but also take it for free AND have the gall to do it with the attitude that it's their right. It's not so much piracy that bugs me as they clearly were never going to pay for it but it's the attitude that some how I'm in the wrong for actually supporting the artists.

The way I see it the majority of my pay goes on stuff that isn't fun in the slightest I actually really like the fact what I can spend freely goes on art like film, tv, comics, music, podcasts.

 

[Rule One]

1 hour ago, 5pints said:

Out of interest. Where do you think it failed to adapt? The porn industry has always been an innovator. At one point the most succussful 3D movie profit wise was a porno, which no doubt helped the pursuit of improving the technology. Also, online credit card security was in a lot of ways created by and credited to the porn industry. 

It's main failure which continues to this day is the state the industry came to be through its old methods of producer power, abuses of performers and the negligence or refusal to accept the consequences of their actions. The ones that have learnt from this survive but will not thrive in the future. The refusal to adapt to how platforms (Social media mainly.) have evolved. Take tube sites, everyone and their dog could see how it was going to go and porn producers could have provided itself with a fairly easily revenue stream with a half decent site but they sat on that method/failed to adapt until it was too late and their content was readily available for people like Rancidpunx to take of advantage of. They prolapsed their own money pit on that front. 

What 3D movie was that? That isn't innovative, it capitalised on the technology and the gamble paid off but for that one success, how many failed before it? It didn't improve it otherwise it would have been heralded and used in a wider scope, as far as I know, it hasn't.

Credit card security again was a means to end wasn't it? If nobody could purchase safely, no money. It may have a hand in a formation of a certain type of credit card security but once they had it locked in they failed to update/improve upon it which led to masses leaks of data from major porn sites from 2005 onwards. Even now its still below the standards of what's needed today.

1 hour ago, Lorne Malvo said:

I don't think there's an issue with OnlyFans itself, it's been a godsend for sex workers and amateurs during the pandemic. It's berks like Bella Thorne misusing the platform that's the problem. 

The issue of the rise of Onlyfans is that it promotes a for all attitude and glamourises itself as a fair and equal platform when it clearly isn't. It has created false expectations amongst content creators, especially new and amateurs that they will make money, they don't advertise it but it is heavily implied by those who champion it from within the industry that its a guarantee. The success of it has bred a false narrative that you can make money for very little effort. Onlyfans efforts to recognise false accounts and scams relating to account spoofing/spawning is shockingly poor. Its failure to acknowledge that not everyone is going to be a success or support/advice for its content creators in regards to safety or mental health issues is piss poor. 

Furthermore, it's being pushed as a force for good (And I acknowledge its a lot better than most of the porn industry.) in a sordid industry but on the other hand fails to combat its influence on younger generations who are seeing Onlyfans dominate sexually suggestive content on platforms like Twitter, Snapchat and Instagram.

It's a more polished front but it isn't as fair or as great as it's been made out to be. That said it is significantly ahead of any of it's competitors in the porn market. Like those before it, it champions itself as a leader before seeing problems that have and will be continued to be caused by it. Nothing is ever going to be idyllic on any front in our lifetime but for an industry that's been dragged through mud, sometimes by itself you'd think they'd be someone in there who thinks a few steps ahead of money. 

@Chris B That's a great post. 

[5pints]

In 1970, Stereovision, a new entity founded by director/inventor Allan Silliphant and optical designer Chris Condon, developed a different 35 mm single-strip format, which printed two images squeezed side by side and used an anamorphic lens to widen the pictures through Polaroid filters. Louis K. Sher (Sherpix) and Stereovision released the softcore sex comedy The Stewardesses (self-rated X, but later re-rated R by the MPAA). The film cost US$100,000 to produce, and ran for months in several markets.^{[citation needed]} eventually earning $27 million in North America, alone ($140 million in constant-2010 dollars) in fewer than 800 theaters, becoming the most profitable 3-Dimensional film to date, and in purely relative terms, one of the most profitable films ever. It was later released in 70 mm 3D. Some 36 films worldwide were made with Stereovision over 25 years, using either a widescreen (above-below), anamorphic (side by side) or 70 mm 3D formats.^{[citation needed]} In 2009 The Stewardesses was remastered by Chris Condon and director Ed Meyer, releasing it in XpanD 3D, RealD Cinema and Dolby 3D.

[Perry]

Channel 4 have announced they are doing a two part documentary on the rise and fall of Ron Jeremy set to air later this year. 

[IANdrewDiceClay]

One of the women Ron Jeremy raped is Hulk Hogan's daughter in law Tana Lea. Just watched a doc called "Fall of a Porn Icon" and would love it if Ron Jeremy lost both legs before getting a life sentence.