| Author |
|
modelbusiness82 
Elite Member
Joined: May 21 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 36575
|
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote  Reply
 Posted: Nov 27 2012 at 5:27pm |
|
Yup, you get the most for gay p.orn. My friend is a guy who also happens to be gay.
|
 |
|
Sponsored Links
|
|
|
fairyQueen092
Elite Member
Joined: Sep 10 2010
Location: Suckmy, Nepal
Status: Offline
Points: 63599
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Nov 27 2012 at 5:29pm |
 modelbusiness82 wrote:
Yup, you get the most for gay p.orn. My friend is a guy who also happens to be gay.
|
Lank? J/k 
|
|
Flowing-Ice
Elite Member
Joined: Feb 27 2010
Location: Fanm Sa Move
Status: Offline
Points: 96313
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Nov 27 2012 at 5:31pm |
most women who are in a career that they want are happier than "regular" women. did the study look at their past (im just saying, that if you come from a really f*cked up home, you might have a lower goal of happiness.)
eta: not just sexual abuse.
Edited by Flowing-Ice - Nov 27 2012 at 5:32pm
|
|
Random Thoughts
Elite Member
Joined: Aug 10 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 67920
|
Post Options
Thanks(1)
Quote Reply
Posted: Nov 27 2012 at 5:59pm |
keepgrowing wrote:
awesome PICS stars are happy.  now i can feel relief from watching PICS *phew*. like really?their mental status wasn't going to influence me viewing their work in the first place because my intellect is not what PICS is stimulating. now lets stop wasting money on frivolous research goodness. |
? 
|
|
modelbusiness82
Elite Member
Joined: May 21 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 36575
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Nov 27 2012 at 6:12pm |
|
|
|
modelbusiness82
Elite Member
Joined: May 21 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 36575
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Nov 27 2012 at 6:14pm |
No this is definitely frivolous research - or at least in the context of the OP article. Judging the "happiness" level of p.orn stars is seriously a waste of $ except to prove that the preconceived notion that all p.orn stars hate themselves is false. I put this study right up there with the one I read about in my child psych course in college that there was a $10M 5yr study done to prove that children who received positive affirmation and affection from their parents turned out better adjusted adults than their counterparts who didn't.
|
|
Random Thoughts
Elite Member
Joined: Aug 10 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 67920
|
Post Options
Thanks(1)
Quote Reply
Posted: Nov 27 2012 at 7:14pm |
|
So what are sex researchers and sociologist suppose to research, if not subjects related to sex and sociology?
If
politicians, lawmakers, and citizens use beliefs such as the 'damaged good
hypothesis' (which is what the researchers studied, not happiness,
that's the spin journalist put to it) to make laws or push agendas, then how is it frivolous to
confirm or verify those commonly accepted beliefs?
Edited by Random Thoughts - Nov 27 2012 at 7:21pm
|
|
jonesable
Elite Member
Joined: Oct 12 2010
Location: SC
Status: Offline
Points: 202265
|
Post Options
Thanks(3)
Quote Reply
Posted: Nov 27 2012 at 7:17pm |
|
Tbh I don't think there is such a thing as frivolous research.
Even if it is thought to be true we still need research to support or refute it.
|
|
modelbusiness82
Elite Member
Joined: May 21 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 36575
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Nov 27 2012 at 7:23pm |
|
It's frivolous in regards to the amount of money spent on it. It's
pretty common knowledge that the anti-adult industry push is a
fundamental one backed by religious groups. They tend to be the only
ones who constantly claim that adult industry workers are inherently
damaged goods.
Short of disproving that claim - which has no
relevance on the actual legal restrictions put on the adult industry
short of the requirement that actors be at least 18 years old, the study
is in fact irrelevant. Everyone in the entertainment industry (myself
included) knows that it is actually the adult niche that drives
technology as it relates to the distribution and consumption of
entertainment content across the board. Innovations in access to
streaming media, torrents, DVD technology, etc were primarily because
the p.orn industry was the first to utilize paid or ad supported content
streaming, migration to DVD vs VHS, etc.
So, the only people
worrying about this (not including the general debate in this thread)
are holier than thou moralists who try to make an excuse for why someone
would want to work in that industry. It's like they really can't
believe that some people genuinely enjoy getting paid to have sex.
|
|
modelbusiness82
Elite Member
Joined: May 21 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 36575
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: Nov 27 2012 at 7:26pm |
|
If we're really going to debate the ethics of p.orn, we should really discuss how little most of the actors actually make considering the heightened level of danger they put themselves into on a daily basis. With the exception of the very well known ones, most get paid a one-off fee. They don't get residual royalties off of their streaming content or DVD sales. And they have NO rights to the content. So, long after they leave the industry, they have no control over what the production house chooses to do with said content. Case in point (and I forget the chick's name) a former actor became a born again Christian, yet her movies are still being promoted - and in fact the production company she used to work with is promoting them harder than ever because she's no longer in the industry. Yet, she sees not one dime of that money.
Compare that to mainstream actors who CAN and do successfully negotiate for residual and syndication rights. (i.e. Friends, Seinfield, Sopranos, etc.)
|
|
Tweet
Topic Options
