hahahahaha, breath, hahahaha. You couldn't out perform me in any physical or mental task. Tell me again how my nutrients suck when you're dead because you are weak, like an infant.
Can say from experience - guys who view little/no porn are usually fire in bed. Guys who are chronic porn viewers typically aren't as creative in bed and take too long to finish or worse yet they never do.
Damn, I should have proof read better. Sounds even worse than I meant it to,
Either way, just making a dumb joke insinuating the first time I ever jacked off was to your mother, and that she was my kindergarten teacher. But I apparently screwed that one up.
Most are probably dangerous to themselves, hardly a danger to others. Well, unless they are operating machinery or driving, that could certainly present a danger to all.
That sounds like a false equivalency. It assumes that all weapons work the same way and serve the same purpose. While they might serve the same purpose (to crush your enemies, and even then, some weapons are more useful as self-defense), they don't work in the same method. Porn destroys the mind of the people who voluntarily watch it. Guns destroy the physical body of the receiving end of the speeding bullet. Additionally, the means by which the weapon is created can also be a factor. One could generate tons of guns and bullets by himself and not be affected much. Porn, on the other hand, requires the cooperation of other consenting parties to record or create it, and it could lead into things like disturbing fetishes that corrupt the mind. jews are already so corrupt and parasitic that it might not even faze them (given their obsession over fecal matter.
I do think there is a problem with describing porn as a weapon (in a strict sense), even if the effects of porn in society might feel like the effects of a mass weapon. The crucial difference being that porn is voluntary. It is more like someone putting a gun in your hands, which a powerful unconscious drive urges you to put to your own head. What these people truly resent isn't - as far as I can tell - the sexual character of the media itself, rather, what it tends to cause them to do with it, i.e. the "Jew" is holding the gun in front of you, but it requires you to pull the trigger. They resent the ongoing manipulative game in which their mental states and desires are being involuntarily fucked with in a continuous way (the nature of the attack being ongoing, rather than a mano a mano stand off with a clear winner, as in a shootout).
First revision: Voat is pro self-defense. The concept of the gun is taken up because they feel that particular means of defending oneself is being threatened.
When they declare porn a "weapon", I think it's easy to discount the important role here of one's own responsibility. It would be like calling fast food, or heroin a weapon as well. Can we truly call something a weapon if you have to volunteer to use it? Perhaps it's that what they really resent is that so many of "their people" are vulnerable to it to begin with.
At the same time, their arguments do seem coherent in an important sense. If the choice to resist temptation is always an ongoing one, and one that requires discipline, it's natural to resent the person attempting to sabotage the things you ultimately value. It doesn't seem unreasonable to say that you don't want heroin being broadcast into the bedrooms of everyone in your society. Of course it's still everyone's personal choice to use it, but given our inherent vulnerabilities, we'd be angry with someone trying to willfully manipulate our baser drives.
The distinction between a physical and psychological weapon is important here. When someone fires a bullet at me, it's hardly my choice whether I am shot. At those velocities, the deciding factor is the shooter's aim. Porn is more like a bullet that stops an inch short of my face until I give it permission to continue. But if I want to defend myself against someone armed with a gun, I require a gun. Hence, the reason for supporting gun ownership (as self-defense). The real distinction is whether the threat is life-or-death, or something subtler and behavioral.
A gun firing a bullet into me kills me (with good chances). This isn't about my choice. To eliminate a person-gun that is an immediate threat to me means having my own gun. This is different than someone dangling a psychological "weapon" in front of your face and waiting for your will to crack. It's not as if you can defend against that with the use of still more porn. You can't fire porn back to stop the threat of porn. You've only made more porn. So there's no case in which porn can be used to defend yourself.
2nd revision: Voat is pro-gun, not in the sense of being pro-weapon, but in being optimally situated to defend their lives against the threat of other people's guns. In the case of the threat of people with guns, the gun is the rebuttal. In the case of porn, there is no rebuttal except one's ongoing abstinence, so in some psychological metaphorical sense, it's like someone "firing" at you all of the time, and your only ability to defend yourself is to shut your eyes and keep walking.
This sort of moral attack is indefensible except by way of personal choice. Or is there another way? You could eliminate that moral weapon from society.
It isn't feasible to do this with guns (this follows more or less from common sense). The people who don't know how to use guns to defend themselves, but who feel threatened by guns nonetheless, want them banned from society. The individual who is pro-gun is simply the person who recognizes the former's solution doesn't work (sweeping gun bans don't work).
The crux of this is that porn can be banned, perhaps not absolutely, but it can at least be forced to the fringe of society, instead of mainlined. Unlike banning guns, banning the porn from society's mainline doesn't intrude on anyone's ability to defend themselves from porn; remember: it is effectively the victim who must "pull the trigger". They're now just forced to go to the fringes of society to "get shot". Banning porn places nobody in danger, whereas banning guns does in a real physical sense.
I do think there is a problem with describing porn as a weapon (in a strict sense)
I don't. I think there can be many definitions of weapon used, and I'm fine with adopting whatever.
The crucial difference being that porn is voluntary.
I don't know that all voluntary things are non-weapons, but I'll allow it.
It is more like someone putting a gun in your hands, which a powerful unconscious drive urges you to put to your own head.
Either the unconscious urge is intrinsic to you, or it is induced by the Jew's brain rays. In the former case, I think even most gun owners are for restricting gun sale to the mentally ill.
They resent the ongoing manipulative game in which their mental states and desires are being involuntarily fucked with in a continuous way
So you're against advertising.
Can we truly call something a weapon if you have to volunteer to use it?
Yes. The enemy creates something with the intended purpose of eliminating you. Whether he or you kill you, your enemy is happy, and your enemy's goal has been achieved. You didn't buy it as a weapon. You bought it as a tool, a tool for getting off. But it was sold to you as a weapon. Maybe we wouldn't say, we used it as a weapon against yourself. But we would say, your enemy used it as a weapon against you.
That reminds me of the saying, "He used my kindness as a weakness." And funny if you replace weakness with weapon here. "He used my kindness as a weapon." As if the manipulator exploited the kindness for control. So kindness itself is not the weapon, but it is used as a weapon by the manipulator.
This isn't about my choice. To eliminate a person-gun that is an immediate threat to me means having my own gun. This is different than someone dangling a psychological "weapon" in front of your face and waiting for your will to crack. It's not as if you can defend against that with the use of still more porn. You can't fire porn back to stop the threat of porn. You've only made more porn. So there's no case in which porn can be used to defend yourself.
Then guns and porn are unalike in the regard that they are necessary for self-defense, but they are alike in that they can be used as a weapon against your enemy.
it's like someone "firing" at you all of the time, and your only ability to defend yourself is to shut your eyes and keep walking.
Porn being "over there" and you being afraid of it because YOU might walk over to it and buy it is like being afraid of everyone open carrying in the grocery store because THEY might shoot you. Sarcastically, with open carry and concealed carry, it's like guns are being pointed at you all the time.
This sort of moral attack is indefensible except by way of personal choice.
Man I am not bombarded with porn advertisements. It's not that porn is shoved in your face and you the choice is for you to say no. It's like there was no porn and you had to go out of your way to choose to say yes to it.
It's not like you had to walk past the porn store every day to get to school, and eventually your will power was broken. It's that you didn't even know there was a porn shop, so you went and looked up where one was, and you drove an hour to the middle of no where to get to it, and chose to buy porn. Except now it's at your URL bar.
Or is there another way? You could eliminate that moral weapon from society.
These sorts of interventions often go poorly. Immediately what came to my mind was alcohol prohibition and the War in Iraq.
Alcohol prohibition rather than the Drug War. Because, let's just say everyone secretly loves alcohol, but everyone hates drugs.
And War in Iraq, because there was a dedicated force of minds against you.
Because, under what I said "let's say", porn is more like alcohol than drugs, in the sense that everyone is actually secretly tolerant or liking of porn.
The crux of this is that porn can be banned, perhaps not absolutely,
Man, as long as cell phones, naked people, and the Internet exist, porn can't be banned.
the fringe of society, instead of mainlined.
Where do you think porn is? Do you see porn shops like McDonald'ses and Taco Bells and Subways? Don't be mad that it takes the same time to load a porn site as any other URL. "Fringes" of a society, I thought, would mean you'd have to physically travel way far out, and so it is difficult. A pilgrimage. But with internet porn, it is too easy. Not only the dedicated will get to it, but even the semi-dedicated. The point is though, it's not in your face. You have to go looking for it.
It's not even like someone hands you a gun, but you have to pull the trigger. It's that you have to go to your URL bar and decide to download a gun.
Unlike banning guns, banning the porn from society's mainline doesn't intrude on anyone's ability to defend themselves from porn
You found a way that guns and porn are different. Guns are an X such that X defends against X, where as porn is not such an X.
Guns and porn can be alike as a weapon. Porn doesn't defend against porn, but it can still harm the enemy.
Guns may primarily be defensive, but they can also be offensive, like toward deer. If I have an enemy, why can't I make a porn fucking his wife in order to offend him? You are taking my weaponry away from me. Right now, it is legal for me to attack my enemy in this way. And you want to take that away from me. You want to take away my freedom.
If his wife, or ex wife say, or widowed mom, or daughter, consent to doing the porn, and I can legally distribute it... Your beef is the effect of porn on the male youth wasting their seed and not creating babies. But what about my right to hurt my enemy with porn by fucking his female family members?
Is it that the wasted seed is the normal effect of porn, whereas the revenge porn scenario is rare? Okay fine.
Well, that was fun. Fortunately I don't think our right to porn hinges on its utility as a weapon or how successfully the analogy to guns goes through.
Even if we agree that it is immoral and illegal to harm a man by boinking his family on camera, what about demeaning women? If I want to demean women, I need to make a facefucking porno with them. There is nothing immoral about demeaning women, like there is something immoral about harming a man. How do you expect me to succeed at my virtuous goals of demeaning women if you won't let me make porn?
Currently on mobile so I can't quote sections of your post. I could, but that is way too much work.
Oxford dictionary gives two senses for the term 'weapon'. The second seems where we ought to be leaning: "a means of gaining an advantage...in a conflict or contest".
Using a more constrained definition of weapon, I'd still stand by my previous argument that any means of damage infliction that requires the victim to voluntarily participate in it, would not qualify as a weapon. At least part of what I take voluntary to mean here is the likelihood that the voluntary victim does not recognize the weapon-hood of whatever it is that they are succumbing to, or if they do, they take its effects to be distributed in such a way that the threat is potential as opposed to necessary (contingent perhaps on time or space or their individual constitution).
In the broader sense of weapon as any means to gain advantage, yes these type of tactics would qualify as a weapon imo.
After some thought, I allowed you to convince me that banning this type of moral assault (if you will) is impossible, but perhaps not specifically for the reasons you gave. This gets into the real meat of what we'd call the revolutionary spirit.
Once certain kinds of "cat" are out of their bags, they become impossible to contain. This goes very deep right to the heart of the human experience, but I will try to contain my hot air more than usual. Like the experiences that throw us into adulthood, there are thresholds we cross in awareness, over which we can't return.
When I said ban previously, what I truly meant was "make it far more difficult to satisfy the urge to consume". For several reasons, this is impossible where it concerns the internet. Even if it is possible via certain routes, the act itself of increasing the exclusivity and taboo of the banned material increases the curiosity about it.
What happens is a paradigm change. This is why revolution itself is such a powerful change agent. At base it involves some introduction that shifts a paradigm by exposing an individual/group to something which they can't be unexposed. The old Hegelian dialectic. Usually our attempts to turn back clocks on the new synthesis and erase awareness, say across generations, are useless.
Porn isn't going away.
So your solution is to utilize it in the same fashion against Jews. This is my fork in the road with your thought.
I understood your "demeaning women" to be undermining their culture by subverting its women via facefucking? Haha. I see the point, but I think it's based on bad assumptions.
Their culture is structured fundamentally differently. Too much to get into here but let's just put it like: their species has a different way of contacting the world and subsisting within it. The west (America for now) built its society with a patriarchal strategy and an organizational framework that placed a heavy load on its protestant moral interpretation of reality.
I suppose it depends on what Jews we are referring to. The conservative, orthodox element, or the communistic revolutionary variety.
The problem with the Jew, and one reason that works against porn being a traditional weapon, is the Jew does use it on itself too. It hurts itself with the same things that it "unleashes", the difference being whatever damage it does to its more conservative elements is not felt in the same systemic way the Christian west has felt it. Partly because the Jew, as a parasite, is far more agile to these kinds of disruptions. The Jew will survive in whatever container you put it in, by revolutionizing the host culture.
Saying that we could damage the Jew with its own revolutions misses the point of what revolution is. It's a relative term experienced most crucially by stable and morally grounded cultures that are more resistant to change because their structures are so much more grounded to the earth. The Jew cannot be revolutionized because the success its "species" has had hasn't relied on a metaphysically-based moral ethic. It has relied on parasitism.
Against that sort of parasitism, our weakness was the very fact we built our american empires on such massive pillars as Christian morals. Things that "big" are easy to tumble with just a few well-placed explosives. With the Jew, you can't shake the foundations of something that doesn't have foundations. The Jew is a historically delocalized free-roaming parasite in terms of strategy. This gives them an advantage, in some senses, against more self-reliant and grounded empires because they have no stability to shake. They see only opportunity, where the western Christian (and most westerners are still christian in their makeup even if they don't profess a Christian god) wants to see meaning and choices that effect the next life.
Our pie in the sky was responsible for the heights we climbed but it is also probably going to be what kills us. Those pillars required real belief and not just the social shadow white westerners enjoy as polite, congenial society. Once the cat is out of the bag and God isn't around, the weapon becomes apparent. But we cannot use it against the Jew anymore than it has already used it against itself. Their ethnocentrism and schizoid nepotism is acting like a better glue for them than Christian sexuality morality is for us.
I understood your "demeaning women" to be undermining their culture by subverting its women via facefucking?
Their culture? No, I just care about facefucking women.
The problem with the Jew, and one reason that works against porn being a traditional weapon, is the Jew does use it on itself too. It hurts itself with the same things that it "unleashes",
Where is the Jew-produced black-on-Jew porn?
The Jew cannot be revolutionized because the success its "species" has had hasn't relied on a metaphysically-based moral ethic. It has relied on parasitism.
Sounds like someone has never heard of the Ferengi rules of acquisition.
Exactly. A gun can protect and feed your family. Enough porn and you'll be too hooked on photoshopped/cartoon 'women' to even be INTERESTED in real women let alone put in the effort to raise kids with one.
Get enough young men in a society to date Rosie Palms instead of Rosie the girls next door and that society. will. die.
How is it a strawman? You compared porn to throwing shit. That you wouldn't dirty your hands by touching it. Now I'm asking you if war should be waged against Jews pornographically, or if that would sully our national image? That you think it is actually more virtuous to keep our enemy down with bloodshed rather than birth control? Err, pornography, since pornography comes with more ills than just bill control.
In order to wage effective pornographic warfare against our enemies, we need brilliant minds of pornographic thinking. You would lock up our military assets.
Literally everyone making porn is making money off of it. It's just then ripped off by countless Torrent/Tube sites that it becomes financially detrimental to the companies producing it to go after them all. DMCA takedowns do happen occasionally from certain producers/companies, but it's not produced and given away for free.
The Jew instituted "women's rights" in Japan after he won the war as well as eliminating all forms of limitations on "freedom of speech". You can guess the result of that.
Girls get like 1k-2k a scene depending on who they are. Sites have subscriptions that are like 9-15 bucks a month. All you need are a few thousand people a month to make that profitable.
They also own Pornhub, which makes money from ads and subscriptions and paid videos--yes, people do pay for porn or you wouldn't have porn on Tubesites as there wouldn't be any porn to rip.
Onlyfans, Chaturbate etc. girls make fucking bank too. Onlyfans girls are drowning in money. They produce their own content that you can't see until you sign up, and charge 10+ bucks a month. One girl with even 200 subscribers at that rate is making fucking bank every month.
iDubzz girlfriend started an OnlyFans, doesn't even do nudes, and made 40,000 her first month.
Porn is insanely profitable. People always say they don't know anyone who subscribes to porn sites, and that may be true, those people may also be lying, but there are people out there who do.
Even Pewds did a video about that. Guy basically bought tits for his gf, then started pimping her out. Now says her pussy is "nothing special". Somehow, that loser reportedly has 7 million subscribers?
Never heard of him before seeing this video of him saying he's fine with guys masturbating to her whatevers. He was trying hard to convince himself, but watch for his coming implosion at some point.
As in appearing in videos? If I were in the market for one, that would be one of the filters. I would not be interested in a wife or gf who engages in intercourse with other men.
communication or dealings between individuals or groups.
"everyday social intercourse"
She's kind of on the far end of social communication. Her behaviors go beyond a simple chat. "Hey guys, look at my parts and masturbate while imagining fucking me!"
A guy who would be okay with his supposed gf doing this has no idea how to have a functional relationship.
I know you're a disinfo shill and I'm taking the bait, but let's go anyways.
To answer your original question: it doesn't make a profit. The porn industry has been operating at more or less a loss since its inception. Back when it was snuff films being passed around illicitly, to brick & mortar adult video stores once it was legalized (the stores made profits, but not the people making the porn), to internet porn sites of today. Porn has never made a profit. So if the people making porn do not see a return on their investment, why do they keep making it? The same answer anyone does something that isn't profitable, it serves some purpose. So what purpose could spreading pornography throughout the white nations serve? You already know the answer since you're a shill, this is just to spell things out for anyone unawares who might tumble upon this conversation.
Was looking more for a factual explanation, not one that requires a tin foil hat. But I appreciate your response.
People who provide multi-million dollar services for millions of dollars of monetary losses, for decades on end, aren't providing the service, obviously, for monetary gain.
If basic logic and basic common sense means "tinfoil hat" to you, then maybe you should reevaluate your beliefs.
Exactly; from a business standpoint it makes absolutely no goddamn sense. If a bakery put that much product out for free it would be bankrupt in a month.
and men who watch porn and still believe all the other stuff are not ?
Left Wing logic is as fucking retarded as a retard that fucked another retard and made a super retard they put in control.... I hate retards that think they are smart that have non retards follow them and enable it all
It's a personal decision, as long as one avoids child porn. I used to hit porn sites when I first started surfing the Web, but after a couple of viruses and overexposure to it, it kind of lost its appeal.
Nobody said you can't be right wing and watch porn. And nobody said you can't watch porn and be right wing.
The argument is that porn is being used as a weapon against Western men, with the goal of keeping them complacent and lowering their natural instinct of seeking out happiness in the traditional way (i.e. by starting a business, a family, and generally filling their lives with meaningful things). This won't work on every man of course, and some will be affected by it less than others. But over a whole population, the results will be significant, with a large portion of young men going down a degeneracy spiral where they keep seeking out more and more degenerate porn to get off, mentally disconnecting them from other things they would be focusing their energy on.
Why is that a bad thing? If one studies music, shouldn't they need to study more and more complex music to appreciate it? If one studies chess, shouldn't they study more and more complex chess games to appreciate it?
There are people that are probably masters of several deplorable acts. Mastering something or investing time into something does not alone make the thing praiseworthy, productive, or ethical.
I'm a long time collector. I know exactly the canary role porn plays in society.
It's a battle between christcuck jihadists who wish to bring about another moral dark age onto humanity - a forced infantilism under the heel of those "who know better" than the rest, and Freedom & Liberation.
2 years ago I would have mostly agreed with you. Now I realize the psychological changes porn causes are beneficial to the goals of the ruling class. Most importantly they want us to fail to care or even notice we are being conquered.
Anyway, dunno how dangerous anti-porn people are. Insincere, hypocritical, annoying - those are words that come to mind. Mostly they try to impose themselves on everyone that disagrees with them. But dangerous? I dunno. Porn shows few signs of going away if that's what that means. And contrary to popular belief - naked women is not a Jewish plot.
Posted automatically (#100521) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@Joe_McCarthy: Click here to suppress your anonymous crosslink notifications)
Posted automatically (#100503) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@VoatContainmentGuard: Click here to suppress your anonymous crosslink notifications)
WheatPrivilege ago
Mandatory jerkoffs?
Floppyhorsecock ago
What if I use my left hand
Straight_up_Prick ago
What about the Alternative right who do masturbate? Yep we are the Masters of Baiters!
RustinKohle ago
Funny how its banned in China. Those dangerous right wingers!
ARightWingThinkTank ago
Did anyone read the article?
The title is ironic, the article itself opposes porn addiction, laughs at those who peddle porn in the legacy media and condemns the left.
The article ends with:
boekanier ago
(((Rolling Stone)))
MockingDead ago
Porn isn't even good. It shows too much dick, and the girl from behind. I miss the good ol' days when porn avoided showing the dude.
I gave up porn because I don't want to spend 45 minutes looking for porn that isn't filled with dicks or nogs.
MockingDead ago
Damnit. First I had to drink milk, then eat meat, now I have to not look at porn?
Why is the alt-right life so hard!
/s
burnthegoyimhaters ago
cut back on the milk, use it as a desert, add more dark greens and potatoes.
sparkscs24 ago
Don’t do this unless you want shit carbs and anti nutrients in your body.
burnthegoyimhaters ago
hahahahaha, breath, hahahaha. You couldn't out perform me in any physical or mental task. Tell me again how my nutrients suck when you're dead because you are weak, like an infant.
MockingDead ago
I don't actually drink milk that often.
dublin5 ago
I dropped milk from my diet and my adult acne disappeared.
burnthegoyimhaters ago
The only time I drink milk is after I break bones, helps heal them faster.
borderline7 ago
you better jerk of all day during quarantine or 6 million Jews will die.
biggdiccbenny ago
Jerkin for Jews
kammmmak ago
(((Rolling Stone: Men Who Abstain From Porn Are Dangerous Alt-Righters)))
Call_Of_Goat ago
I stop watching porn a long time ago and my life actually got better.
CantPleaseHer ago
Can say from experience - guys who view little/no porn are usually fire in bed. Guys who are chronic porn viewers typically aren't as creative in bed and take too long to finish or worse yet they never do.
Fatpass121 ago
User name checks out, NEVER takes too long to cum
Soyboy69 ago
Glad we could get feedback from a whore/faggot.
andrew_white_forever ago
I haven't nutted in half a year and am ready to exterminate the Jewish race with nothing but my bare hands and teeth.
jewsbadnews ago
I'v gone over 400 days before.
Fatpass121 ago
Went 6 years once,
jewsbadnews ago
Idk what you mean.
Fatpass121 ago
Damn, I should have proof read better. Sounds even worse than I meant it to,
Either way, just making a dumb joke insinuating the first time I ever jacked off was to your mother, and that she was my kindergarten teacher. But I apparently screwed that one up.
Tsilent_Tsunami ago
Guy suffering from social isolation just did that. Stripped naked, then ran into the street and killed a woman with his hands and mouth.
andrew_white_forever ago
Lol that was an Indian not a person
FSHLLtOW ago
Cool! I must be a real dangerous man!
Inaminit ago
And I have nothing to lose...
awwisnotafarmpromise ago
Most are probably dangerous to themselves, hardly a danger to others. Well, unless they are operating machinery or driving, that could certainly present a danger to all.
T101genisys ago
It's a mental and physical weapon against men. Turn away from it.
antiracistMetal ago
Porn is a weapon. A gun is a weapon. Voat is pro gun. Voat is anti porn.
TerrifiedTyphlosion ago
That sounds like a false equivalency. It assumes that all weapons work the same way and serve the same purpose. While they might serve the same purpose (to crush your enemies, and even then, some weapons are more useful as self-defense), they don't work in the same method. Porn destroys the mind of the people who voluntarily watch it. Guns destroy the physical body of the receiving end of the speeding bullet. Additionally, the means by which the weapon is created can also be a factor. One could generate tons of guns and bullets by himself and not be affected much. Porn, on the other hand, requires the cooperation of other consenting parties to record or create it, and it could lead into things like disturbing fetishes that corrupt the mind. jews are already so corrupt and parasitic that it might not even faze them (given their obsession over fecal matter.
In the end, not all weapons are created equal.
chirogonemd ago
I do think there is a problem with describing porn as a weapon (in a strict sense), even if the effects of porn in society might feel like the effects of a mass weapon. The crucial difference being that porn is voluntary. It is more like someone putting a gun in your hands, which a powerful unconscious drive urges you to put to your own head. What these people truly resent isn't - as far as I can tell - the sexual character of the media itself, rather, what it tends to cause them to do with it, i.e. the "Jew" is holding the gun in front of you, but it requires you to pull the trigger. They resent the ongoing manipulative game in which their mental states and desires are being involuntarily fucked with in a continuous way (the nature of the attack being ongoing, rather than a mano a mano stand off with a clear winner, as in a shootout).
First revision: Voat is pro self-defense. The concept of the gun is taken up because they feel that particular means of defending oneself is being threatened.
When they declare porn a "weapon", I think it's easy to discount the important role here of one's own responsibility. It would be like calling fast food, or heroin a weapon as well. Can we truly call something a weapon if you have to volunteer to use it? Perhaps it's that what they really resent is that so many of "their people" are vulnerable to it to begin with.
At the same time, their arguments do seem coherent in an important sense. If the choice to resist temptation is always an ongoing one, and one that requires discipline, it's natural to resent the person attempting to sabotage the things you ultimately value. It doesn't seem unreasonable to say that you don't want heroin being broadcast into the bedrooms of everyone in your society. Of course it's still everyone's personal choice to use it, but given our inherent vulnerabilities, we'd be angry with someone trying to willfully manipulate our baser drives.
The distinction between a physical and psychological weapon is important here. When someone fires a bullet at me, it's hardly my choice whether I am shot. At those velocities, the deciding factor is the shooter's aim. Porn is more like a bullet that stops an inch short of my face until I give it permission to continue. But if I want to defend myself against someone armed with a gun, I require a gun. Hence, the reason for supporting gun ownership (as self-defense). The real distinction is whether the threat is life-or-death, or something subtler and behavioral.
A gun firing a bullet into me kills me (with good chances). This isn't about my choice. To eliminate a person-gun that is an immediate threat to me means having my own gun. This is different than someone dangling a psychological "weapon" in front of your face and waiting for your will to crack. It's not as if you can defend against that with the use of still more porn. You can't fire porn back to stop the threat of porn. You've only made more porn. So there's no case in which porn can be used to defend yourself.
2nd revision: Voat is pro-gun, not in the sense of being pro-weapon, but in being optimally situated to defend their lives against the threat of other people's guns. In the case of the threat of people with guns, the gun is the rebuttal. In the case of porn, there is no rebuttal except one's ongoing abstinence, so in some psychological metaphorical sense, it's like someone "firing" at you all of the time, and your only ability to defend yourself is to shut your eyes and keep walking.
This sort of moral attack is indefensible except by way of personal choice. Or is there another way? You could eliminate that moral weapon from society.
It isn't feasible to do this with guns (this follows more or less from common sense). The people who don't know how to use guns to defend themselves, but who feel threatened by guns nonetheless, want them banned from society. The individual who is pro-gun is simply the person who recognizes the former's solution doesn't work (sweeping gun bans don't work).
The crux of this is that porn can be banned, perhaps not absolutely, but it can at least be forced to the fringe of society, instead of mainlined. Unlike banning guns, banning the porn from society's mainline doesn't intrude on anyone's ability to defend themselves from porn; remember: it is effectively the victim who must "pull the trigger". They're now just forced to go to the fringes of society to "get shot". Banning porn places nobody in danger, whereas banning guns does in a real physical sense.
antiracistMetal ago
In this post: https://voat.co/v/politics/3734270/23139406 I pitched the idea of using porn as a weapon against Jews. It's from that point that I'm going to answer.
I don't. I think there can be many definitions of weapon used, and I'm fine with adopting whatever.
I don't know that all voluntary things are non-weapons, but I'll allow it.
Either the unconscious urge is intrinsic to you, or it is induced by the Jew's brain rays. In the former case, I think even most gun owners are for restricting gun sale to the mentally ill.
So you're against advertising.
Yes. The enemy creates something with the intended purpose of eliminating you. Whether he or you kill you, your enemy is happy, and your enemy's goal has been achieved. You didn't buy it as a weapon. You bought it as a tool, a tool for getting off. But it was sold to you as a weapon. Maybe we wouldn't say, we used it as a weapon against yourself. But we would say, your enemy used it as a weapon against you.
That reminds me of the saying, "He used my kindness as a weakness." And funny if you replace weakness with weapon here. "He used my kindness as a weapon." As if the manipulator exploited the kindness for control. So kindness itself is not the weapon, but it is used as a weapon by the manipulator.
Then guns and porn are unalike in the regard that they are necessary for self-defense, but they are alike in that they can be used as a weapon against your enemy.
Porn being "over there" and you being afraid of it because YOU might walk over to it and buy it is like being afraid of everyone open carrying in the grocery store because THEY might shoot you. Sarcastically, with open carry and concealed carry, it's like guns are being pointed at you all the time.
Man I am not bombarded with porn advertisements. It's not that porn is shoved in your face and you the choice is for you to say no. It's like there was no porn and you had to go out of your way to choose to say yes to it.
It's not like you had to walk past the porn store every day to get to school, and eventually your will power was broken. It's that you didn't even know there was a porn shop, so you went and looked up where one was, and you drove an hour to the middle of no where to get to it, and chose to buy porn. Except now it's at your URL bar.
These sorts of interventions often go poorly. Immediately what came to my mind was alcohol prohibition and the War in Iraq.
Alcohol prohibition rather than the Drug War. Because, let's just say everyone secretly loves alcohol, but everyone hates drugs.
And War in Iraq, because there was a dedicated force of minds against you.
Because, under what I said "let's say", porn is more like alcohol than drugs, in the sense that everyone is actually secretly tolerant or liking of porn.
Man, as long as cell phones, naked people, and the Internet exist, porn can't be banned.
Where do you think porn is? Do you see porn shops like McDonald'ses and Taco Bells and Subways? Don't be mad that it takes the same time to load a porn site as any other URL. "Fringes" of a society, I thought, would mean you'd have to physically travel way far out, and so it is difficult. A pilgrimage. But with internet porn, it is too easy. Not only the dedicated will get to it, but even the semi-dedicated. The point is though, it's not in your face. You have to go looking for it.
It's not even like someone hands you a gun, but you have to pull the trigger. It's that you have to go to your URL bar and decide to download a gun.
You found a way that guns and porn are different. Guns are an X such that X defends against X, where as porn is not such an X.
Guns and porn can be alike as a weapon. Porn doesn't defend against porn, but it can still harm the enemy.
Guns may primarily be defensive, but they can also be offensive, like toward deer. If I have an enemy, why can't I make a porn fucking his wife in order to offend him? You are taking my weaponry away from me. Right now, it is legal for me to attack my enemy in this way. And you want to take that away from me. You want to take away my freedom.
If his wife, or ex wife say, or widowed mom, or daughter, consent to doing the porn, and I can legally distribute it... Your beef is the effect of porn on the male youth wasting their seed and not creating babies. But what about my right to hurt my enemy with porn by fucking his female family members?
Is it that the wasted seed is the normal effect of porn, whereas the revenge porn scenario is rare? Okay fine.
Well, that was fun. Fortunately I don't think our right to porn hinges on its utility as a weapon or how successfully the analogy to guns goes through.
Even if we agree that it is immoral and illegal to harm a man by boinking his family on camera, what about demeaning women? If I want to demean women, I need to make a facefucking porno with them. There is nothing immoral about demeaning women, like there is something immoral about harming a man. How do you expect me to succeed at my virtuous goals of demeaning women if you won't let me make porn?
@eagleshigh @bojangles @sarmegahhikkitha @heygeorge
chirogonemd ago
Currently on mobile so I can't quote sections of your post. I could, but that is way too much work.
Oxford dictionary gives two senses for the term 'weapon'. The second seems where we ought to be leaning: "a means of gaining an advantage...in a conflict or contest".
Using a more constrained definition of weapon, I'd still stand by my previous argument that any means of damage infliction that requires the victim to voluntarily participate in it, would not qualify as a weapon. At least part of what I take voluntary to mean here is the likelihood that the voluntary victim does not recognize the weapon-hood of whatever it is that they are succumbing to, or if they do, they take its effects to be distributed in such a way that the threat is potential as opposed to necessary (contingent perhaps on time or space or their individual constitution).
In the broader sense of weapon as any means to gain advantage, yes these type of tactics would qualify as a weapon imo.
After some thought, I allowed you to convince me that banning this type of moral assault (if you will) is impossible, but perhaps not specifically for the reasons you gave. This gets into the real meat of what we'd call the revolutionary spirit.
Once certain kinds of "cat" are out of their bags, they become impossible to contain. This goes very deep right to the heart of the human experience, but I will try to contain my hot air more than usual. Like the experiences that throw us into adulthood, there are thresholds we cross in awareness, over which we can't return.
When I said ban previously, what I truly meant was "make it far more difficult to satisfy the urge to consume". For several reasons, this is impossible where it concerns the internet. Even if it is possible via certain routes, the act itself of increasing the exclusivity and taboo of the banned material increases the curiosity about it.
What happens is a paradigm change. This is why revolution itself is such a powerful change agent. At base it involves some introduction that shifts a paradigm by exposing an individual/group to something which they can't be unexposed. The old Hegelian dialectic. Usually our attempts to turn back clocks on the new synthesis and erase awareness, say across generations, are useless.
Porn isn't going away.
So your solution is to utilize it in the same fashion against Jews. This is my fork in the road with your thought.
I understood your "demeaning women" to be undermining their culture by subverting its women via facefucking? Haha. I see the point, but I think it's based on bad assumptions.
Their culture is structured fundamentally differently. Too much to get into here but let's just put it like: their species has a different way of contacting the world and subsisting within it. The west (America for now) built its society with a patriarchal strategy and an organizational framework that placed a heavy load on its protestant moral interpretation of reality.
I suppose it depends on what Jews we are referring to. The conservative, orthodox element, or the communistic revolutionary variety.
The problem with the Jew, and one reason that works against porn being a traditional weapon, is the Jew does use it on itself too. It hurts itself with the same things that it "unleashes", the difference being whatever damage it does to its more conservative elements is not felt in the same systemic way the Christian west has felt it. Partly because the Jew, as a parasite, is far more agile to these kinds of disruptions. The Jew will survive in whatever container you put it in, by revolutionizing the host culture.
Saying that we could damage the Jew with its own revolutions misses the point of what revolution is. It's a relative term experienced most crucially by stable and morally grounded cultures that are more resistant to change because their structures are so much more grounded to the earth. The Jew cannot be revolutionized because the success its "species" has had hasn't relied on a metaphysically-based moral ethic. It has relied on parasitism.
Against that sort of parasitism, our weakness was the very fact we built our american empires on such massive pillars as Christian morals. Things that "big" are easy to tumble with just a few well-placed explosives. With the Jew, you can't shake the foundations of something that doesn't have foundations. The Jew is a historically delocalized free-roaming parasite in terms of strategy. This gives them an advantage, in some senses, against more self-reliant and grounded empires because they have no stability to shake. They see only opportunity, where the western Christian (and most westerners are still christian in their makeup even if they don't profess a Christian god) wants to see meaning and choices that effect the next life.
Our pie in the sky was responsible for the heights we climbed but it is also probably going to be what kills us. Those pillars required real belief and not just the social shadow white westerners enjoy as polite, congenial society. Once the cat is out of the bag and God isn't around, the weapon becomes apparent. But we cannot use it against the Jew anymore than it has already used it against itself. Their ethnocentrism and schizoid nepotism is acting like a better glue for them than Christian sexuality morality is for us.
antiracistMetal ago
Their culture? No, I just care about facefucking women.
Where is the Jew-produced black-on-Jew porn?
Sounds like someone has never heard of the Ferengi rules of acquisition.
No such thing.
chirogonemd ago
Weren't those Star Trek's version of Jews? Haha.
PeckerwoodPerry ago
Porn isn't a weapon I can use against my enemies, but a gun is. Figure it out coomer.
Cade_Connelly_13 ago
Exactly. A gun can protect and feed your family. Enough porn and you'll be too hooked on photoshopped/cartoon 'women' to even be INTERESTED in real women let alone put in the effort to raise kids with one.
Get enough young men in a society to date Rosie Palms instead of Rosie the girls next door and that society. will. die.
antiracistMetal ago
Why can your enemies use it against you, but you can't use it against them?
PeckerwoodPerry ago
Because I'm not a degenerate fuck. Shit can be used as a weapon too, but I'm not picking it up to throw at people.
antiracistMetal ago
So you would be against our military targeting Jews with porn we produce specifically to keep down their numbers?
But you're fine with bombing them?
@eagleshigh @bojangles @sarmegahhikkitha @heygeorge @jewsbadnews
PeckerwoodPerry ago
That's a cute strawman you've built, where'd you learn how to do that? Israel?
antiracistMetal ago
How is it a strawman? You compared porn to throwing shit. That you wouldn't dirty your hands by touching it. Now I'm asking you if war should be waged against Jews pornographically, or if that would sully our national image? That you think it is actually more virtuous to keep our enemy down with bloodshed rather than birth control? Err, pornography, since pornography comes with more ills than just bill control.
In order to wage effective pornographic warfare against our enemies, we need brilliant minds of pornographic thinking. You would lock up our military assets.
@eagleshigh @bojangles @sarmegahhikkitha @heygeorge @jewsbadnews
heygeorge ago
@antiracistmetal is a black African
antiracistMetal ago
Blax r da reel joos. Return home now.
Logansrun ago
Got to ask yourself why it’s given away for free & what group is beyond most of the production
killkillkill ago
It's not given away for free...
Literally everyone making porn is making money off of it. It's just then ripped off by countless Torrent/Tube sites that it becomes financially detrimental to the companies producing it to go after them all. DMCA takedowns do happen occasionally from certain producers/companies, but it's not produced and given away for free.
antiracistMetal ago
So Jews are behind anime tentacle porn?
@eagleshigh @bojangles @sarmegahhikkitha @jewsbadnews @heygeorge
Count_Monte_Cristo ago
Yes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beate_Sirota_Gordon
The Jew instituted "women's rights" in Japan after he won the war as well as eliminating all forms of limitations on "freedom of speech". You can guess the result of that.
M80TheMan ago
Kikes sure love to wring their hands. You can’t make this stuff up.
ThirteenthZodiac ago
I saw the picture, but still had to confirm by reading her bio.
Every. Fucking. Time.
Bremertonbruiser ago
I see you are a man of culture as well. @count
Logansrun ago
along with blackened, incest & homo stuff.
mmabouncer ago
I'm curious how they make money, now. How is it this prolific if it's not profitable?
killkillkill ago
It is profitable. Porn? You kidding me?
Girls get like 1k-2k a scene depending on who they are. Sites have subscriptions that are like 9-15 bucks a month. All you need are a few thousand people a month to make that profitable.
They also own Pornhub, which makes money from ads and subscriptions and paid videos--yes, people do pay for porn or you wouldn't have porn on Tubesites as there wouldn't be any porn to rip.
Onlyfans, Chaturbate etc. girls make fucking bank too. Onlyfans girls are drowning in money. They produce their own content that you can't see until you sign up, and charge 10+ bucks a month. One girl with even 200 subscribers at that rate is making fucking bank every month.
iDubzz girlfriend started an OnlyFans, doesn't even do nudes, and made 40,000 her first month.
Porn is insanely profitable. People always say they don't know anyone who subscribes to porn sites, and that may be true, those people may also be lying, but there are people out there who do.
Tsilent_Tsunami ago
Even Pewds did a video about that. Guy basically bought tits for his gf, then started pimping her out. Now says her pussy is "nothing special". Somehow, that loser reportedly has 7 million subscribers?
killkillkill ago
I mean, you can say he's a loser, but iDubbz makes awesome content. Haven't you seen his Content Cop videos?
I hadn't heard he bought her tits. She's always had big ones. She doesn't do nudes on OF.
Tsilent_Tsunami ago
Never heard of him before seeing this video of him saying he's fine with guys masturbating to her whatevers. He was trying hard to convince himself, but watch for his coming implosion at some point.
killkillkill ago
I mean, if you have a girlfriend who appears on the internet, guys are gonna jerk it to her.
Tsilent_Tsunami ago
Exactly.
killkillkill ago
So your implication is to never allow your girlfriend to be on the internet in any way whatsoever?
Tsilent_Tsunami ago
As in appearing in videos? If I were in the market for one, that would be one of the filters. I would not be interested in a wife or gf who engages in intercourse with other men.
killkillkill ago
iDubbz's girl isn't engaging in intercourse with other man...
Tsilent_Tsunami ago
She's kind of on the far end of social communication. Her behaviors go beyond a simple chat. "Hey guys, look at my parts and masturbate while imagining fucking me!"
A guy who would be okay with his supposed gf doing this has no idea how to have a functional relationship.
Approved ago
It's done to destroy christian western society, not to generate an immediate monetary return.
Same reason they buy up all the print newspapers in 2020; it sure as fuck isn't to make money.
mmabouncer ago
Was looking more for a factual explanation, not one that requires a tin foil hat. But I appreciate your response.
Narow_Foe_Minsk ago
I know you're a disinfo shill and I'm taking the bait, but let's go anyways.
To answer your original question: it doesn't make a profit. The porn industry has been operating at more or less a loss since its inception. Back when it was snuff films being passed around illicitly, to brick & mortar adult video stores once it was legalized (the stores made profits, but not the people making the porn), to internet porn sites of today. Porn has never made a profit. So if the people making porn do not see a return on their investment, why do they keep making it? The same answer anyone does something that isn't profitable, it serves some purpose. So what purpose could spreading pornography throughout the white nations serve? You already know the answer since you're a shill, this is just to spell things out for anyone unawares who might tumble upon this conversation.
mmabouncer ago
Nice theory, but a bit to tin foily for me. Any sources for any of this?
Bremertonbruiser ago
@bouncer. It is also to provide themselves with a steady stream of pleasure dolls and they watch the stuff to
Approved ago
People who provide multi-million dollar services for millions of dollars of monetary losses, for decades on end, aren't providing the service, obviously, for monetary gain.
If basic logic and basic common sense means "tinfoil hat" to you, then maybe you should reevaluate your beliefs.
favoritecoloriswhite ago
Not consuming mass amounts of degenerate porn is anti-semitic!
thebearfromstartrack ago
All of the free stuff online, makes you wonder how this is a business and not a deliberate temptation/trap.
Cade_Connelly_13 ago
Exactly; from a business standpoint it makes absolutely no goddamn sense. If a bakery put that much product out for free it would be bankrupt in a month.
numscul54 ago
and men who watch porn and still believe all the other stuff are not ?
Left Wing logic is as fucking retarded as a retard that fucked another retard and made a super retard they put in control.... I hate retards that think they are smart that have non retards follow them and enable it all
veteran88 ago
Porn should be banned and everyone involved in it executed for malicious temptation and treason.
Any trafficked women will be freed. Any who voluntary did it get the rope.
Approved ago
Rope? Why not the comfort station for our troops?
veteran88 ago
Strap them to rape racks and let the troops use them to breed jannisaries
saved_bears_ears ago
Someone could diagram it all in detail, how the entire system works without mystification. End of any controversy.
metricisokay ago
Damn right.
Gubamaharama ago
Yes!
waucka ago
You're damn right we are!
Kristov ago
What kind of man would read this shitty rolling stones article and not want to be seen as dangerous?
XSS1337 ago
Lol I see what you did there
Tabnam ago
Lmao, you think skinned pansy loosers are a threat to no one.
drhitler ago
multiculturlism is dead after corona clears up if you are in a western nation and have slanty eyes i suggest you fuck off now
the silent majority are starting to make lots of noise
Helena73 ago
Something about skinny pants? Loose threads ...
Its hard to type with only one free hand COOMER
HiJoker ago
Is that like fell off their bike and 'skinned' a knee or like Hannibal Lecter skinned for meat?
burnthegoyimhaters ago
Being from south dakota this reads, "Indians are pansy losers"
Jock_Sniffer ago
It's a personal decision, as long as one avoids child porn. I used to hit porn sites when I first started surfing the Web, but after a couple of viruses and overexposure to it, it kind of lost its appeal.
tokui ago
The govt owns terabytes of child porn.
AnarchicAlpaca ago
no
armday2day ago
The left demands compliance
tokui ago
I savour porn. I'm beyond ultra-right wing.
Pls explain.
favoritecoloriswhite ago
Nobody said you can't be right wing and watch porn. And nobody said you can't watch porn and be right wing.
The argument is that porn is being used as a weapon against Western men, with the goal of keeping them complacent and lowering their natural instinct of seeking out happiness in the traditional way (i.e. by starting a business, a family, and generally filling their lives with meaningful things). This won't work on every man of course, and some will be affected by it less than others. But over a whole population, the results will be significant, with a large portion of young men going down a degeneracy spiral where they keep seeking out more and more degenerate porn to get off, mentally disconnecting them from other things they would be focusing their energy on.
antiracistMetal ago
Why is that a bad thing? If one studies music, shouldn't they need to study more and more complex music to appreciate it? If one studies chess, shouldn't they study more and more complex chess games to appreciate it?
HonkHonkHonk ago
So... We have a degenerate, a chess master, and a virtuoso. Hmmmmmmmmm
antiracistMetal ago
You can't tell me that some pornography isn't brilliant.
HonkHonkHonk ago
There are people that are probably masters of several deplorable acts. Mastering something or investing time into something does not alone make the thing praiseworthy, productive, or ethical.
CowWithBeef ago
You probably haven't thought very hard about who runs the porn industry and why it is free.
tokui ago
I'm a long time collector. I know exactly the canary role porn plays in society.
It's a battle between christcuck jihadists who wish to bring about another moral dark age onto humanity - a forced infantilism under the heel of those "who know better" than the rest, and Freedom & Liberation.
CowWithBeef ago
2 years ago I would have mostly agreed with you. Now I realize the psychological changes porn causes are beneficial to the goals of the ruling class. Most importantly they want us to fail to care or even notice we are being conquered.
tokui ago
We are moving to non-sexual reproduction.
This left-right, liberal-conservative game is to keep us bogged down.
Joe_McCarthy ago
Maybe he hasn't. But I have.
https://voat.co/v/OccidentalEnclave/3434820
Anyway, dunno how dangerous anti-porn people are. Insincere, hypocritical, annoying - those are words that come to mind. Mostly they try to impose themselves on everyone that disagrees with them. But dangerous? I dunno. Porn shows few signs of going away if that's what that means. And contrary to popular belief - naked women is not a Jewish plot.
SearchVoatBot ago
This comment was linked from this anonymous v/QRV comment.
Posted automatically (#100521) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@Joe_McCarthy: Click here to suppress your anonymous crosslink notifications)
metricisokay ago
It must mean you're so masculine that your labido can take the hit.
WeareGOD11 ago
Lmao. that's saying a lot.
Maroonsaint ago
Let me see your dick then
HeavyBrain ago
He will if you pay, fans only lad.
In time of crisis we all have to make a buck.
VoatContainmentGuard ago
oy vey QRV approves!
SearchVoatBot ago
This comment was linked from this anonymous v/QRV comment.
Posted automatically (#100503) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@VoatContainmentGuard: Click here to suppress your anonymous crosslink notifications)