#and obviously there are issues wrt consent and human trafficking and women's rights

[ravenkings]

going to preface this by saying that this is an extremely nuanced issue that i don’t have a particularly coherent view on, but one issue i see with a lot of anti-pornography arguments (specifically in terms of pornography using live actors) is the idea that you are seeing a person as an object/commodity, but like......at the same time.....isn’t that how we view film/television actors all the time???** 

like... a “normal” actor is also using their body as a commodity (since they are, usually, being paid) to produce an emotional response and thus tell a story and, if we’re being honest here, the only REAL difference is what exactly the actor is willing to physically DO and the kind of emotional response they are trying to evoke. 

and like....if you want to argue that your position as a viewer watching actors have sex is somehow a qualitatively different experience from watching actors in a “normal” hollywood film, i would ask... barring certain aesthetic decisions...how exactly? the only way that argument makes any sense imo is if you buy into the idea that sex is somehow a qualitatively different activity than any other human activity, which is, i would say, not an argument you can make without backing it up thoroughly. 

**i will also say that, historically, acting and sex work have always been intimately intertwined and one of the reasons why women were forbidden from acting in some cultures and historical eras is bc of the implicit connection to prostitution.