Comments on: Trouble in Milton Keynes

By: Christopher Shell

Christopher Shell — Wed, 12 Oct 2005 15:53:22 +0000

People have free will. What all of us lack in greater or lesser measure is willpower. And there’s the rub.

By: tom p

tom p — Mon, 10 Oct 2005 09:54:31 +0000

You can well be aware of the long-term effects of doing something which is fun the first few times you do it. For example, I’m well aware of the long-term effects of booze, and have been since before I first drunk booze, but that doesn’t stop me drinking.

If something that is fun in the short term stops being fun in the long term then stop doing it. It’s as simple as that.
You seem to be implying that people are compelled to do everything htat you disapprove of and have no free will

By: Christopher Shell

Christopher Shell — Sun, 09 Oct 2005 11:17:51 +0000

The nettle is not being grasped: Plenty of things are fun short-term and regretted long-term. The first time (or first few times) people do things, they cannot by definition be aware of long-term effects, unless of course someone has toild them – and even then they probably wouldnt have listened. The way you talk, one would think that everything that is fun short-term is also fun long-term.
???

By: tom p

tom p — Fri, 07 Oct 2005 09:59:05 +0000

Well, yes, I don’t think that anyone would ever be so foolish as to dispute that workers in the pr0n industry are, by definition, incredibly promiscuous.
However, to postulate that they all inherently see marriage as ‘uncool’ is foolish, especially as it comes from (I assume, although I concede that you could well be a former pr0n star) no experience.
I’ve no idea about whether the actors married in real life would be married on film, it’s unlikely since marriage isn’t necessarily an integral part of the tiny number of pr0n films that i’ve seen. Perhaps Shaun can shed some light on the subject.
Of course, that’s not the issue.
If all parties (the actors and their spouse) are consenting to them starring in the films, or just having sex outside the marriage off camera for fun, then no harm is done as long as all people are honest with each other and all parties readily agree it.

By: Christopher Shell

Christopher Shell — Thu, 06 Oct 2005 14:37:25 +0000

Of course, it allcomes down to the brain in the end. But one’s better judgment (or willpower), as we all know, can sometimes be at odds with one’s flesh.

When I associated the trade with promiscuity, I meant that it is part of the nexus that sees unmarried as cool and married as uncool. For example, whoever was married in real life would be unlikely (correct me if Im wrong) also to be married in the film. Or,even if they were, they would also sleep with people to whom they were not married.

By: tom p

tom p — Thu, 06 Oct 2005 10:12:38 +0000

1) You’re not “sharing the intimacy with … mating couples on screen”, you’re viewing the images and getting the horn. They aren’t actually there with you in the box actually rutting away. It’s just electrons hitting a reactive surface (assuming a cathode ray tube tv).

2) “practically no correlation at all between married couples and this kind of acting”. There’s far more married people than there are pr0n actors. Many pr0n actors are indeed married, either to fellow actors or to directors. You need to spend more time watching mastumentaries on channels 4 or 5 or on tawdry cable like ftn before you postulate on the off-screen lives of pr0n stars.
Given that a pr0n star clearly isn’t overly worried about the exclusivity of the sexual act in a monogamous relationship, marriage to another pr0n star is usually very stable because neither of them is overly jealous of the other.
Oh, and before you start on the health risks, they all have to have a medical check each month and get a clean bill of health before they can act in any films. If anything, they probably have greater sexual health than the population at large and are more likely to have and long-term genital illnesses (eg cervical cancer) picked up earlier than anyone else.
3) Why do we need to distinguish between brains and loins for wanting to view the pr0n? If anything, I’d say that there’s no cerebral reason for wanting to view pr0n, what with the bad acting and all, and that the purely lusty reason for wanting to watch pr0n is, if anything, superior.
And as for the biochemistry of it…
If you’ve got the horn and a consequent desire to get your rocks off, that’s because the sexually stimulating hormones such as testosterone have bound to the receptors in your brain triggering release of further neurotransmitters going down the ‘sexy pathway’ (my phrase) to get you all horny and stimulated. The loins and the brain work together here

By: Andrew Nixon

Andrew Nixon — Thu, 06 Oct 2005 09:32:53 +0000

as had Cathy, should read as has Cathy…. damn typos.

By: Andrew Nixon

Andrew Nixon — Thu, 06 Oct 2005 09:24:55 +0000

(2) You donâ€t consider the actors and actresses. Why is it, I wonder, that there is practically no correlation at all between married couples and this kind of acting. Because it is intrinsically promiscuous - and therefore intrinsically opposed to marital and societal stability, which in turn is correlated to increased crime etc.. The actors will never know exclusivity - how easy will it be for them to have any stable relationship at all?

Ben Dover (not his real name), the UKs leading male porn actor has been happily married for years, with kids, as had Cathy Barry, the UKs leading female porn star. Indeed, the most succesful porn stars around the world do tend to be those that are married or in long term relationships.

By: Christopher Shell

Christopher Shell — Thu, 06 Oct 2005 08:57:33 +0000

Hi Tom-
An awful lot of issues that you don’t address:
(1) Of course it diminishes the exclusivity. As between sharing intimacy with or without mating couples on screen, which of the two is more exclusive? And which less? You already know the answer.
(2) You don’t consider the actors and actresses. Why is it, I wonder, that there is practically no correlation at all between married couples and this kind of acting. Because it is intrinsically promiscuous – and therefore intrinsically opposed to marital and societal stability, which in turn is correlated to increased crime etc.. The actors will never know exclusivity – how easy will it be for them to have any stable relationship at all?
(3) When you speak of ‘wanting’ to view such films, we need to distinguish between two kind of ‘wanting’. You’re not suggesting that the brain wanting something and the loins wanting something are the same thing? Or that the brain and the loins are one and the same? Come now – what happened to your biological background?

By: tom p

tom p — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 11:00:41 +0000

Andrew – you must have missed Terry Wogan’s stabathon around Television Centre after reading The Devil of White City.
Of course, he wasn’t a film reviewer at the time, but it’s still proof that TV makes you deranged. Either that or wigs, I’m just not sure which.