The Gaming Den

Yeah, that's a line even I wouldn't cross.

I'd like some answers as to why and how this happened, but if I was in charge of art and Israel asked me to censor it I'd tell them to get fucked.

Don't misunderstand me, it's in exceptionally poor taste but I'm pissed that Israel is asking people to take it down.

Count Arioch the 28th wrote:I'd like some answers as to why and how this happened, but if I was in charge of art and Israel asked me to censor it I'd tell them to get fucked.

Don't misunderstand me, it's in exceptionally poor taste but I'm pissed that Israel is asking people to take it down.

It can be seen as desecrating a site of great personal tragedy to the Israeli people, but I think what bothers the survivors more is the fact that the Polish government don't really seem to give a fuck about the place. It doesn't seem to be a protected site, memorialized, or even really guarded.

Makes the Polish look like they don't give a fuck about an atrocity on their soil, committed to their people.

Well, isn't Poland getting more and more fascist, lately?

You know, I've never been a huge fan of anime porn actually. There are comically exaggerated amounts of fluids, the anatomy is odd and doesn't look natural, the sex scenes read remarkably similar to the sex scenes I wrote when I was a 14 year old virgin (i.e., they don't resemble sex in any actual way). I know porn is fantasy but anime porn just doesn't tickle my pickle.

I'd like to comment on that article but it asked me to disable my adblock, and I'm not doing that.

Then again, my brain has been medically verified to be broken and a lot of things don't do it for me. Schoolgirl outfits are a boner killer for me, and I don't understand why wearing the uniform of an underaged girl is exciting to so many people who are demonstrably not paedophiles.

It's at least partly the lure of the forbidden, both in terms of age and of culture - see "Catholic Schoolgirls in Trouble". Also many people find uniforms sexy (with men it's usually military uniforms).

Fetishes are often cases of intersections of several different things. There isn't a single reason, even for an individual.

Funny thing is, virtually all modern porn has the participants with their bodies shaved clean. Despite you know, body hair being one of the signs of a maturing/mature body, while a body completely devoid of hair below the top of the head is naturally a sign of somebody underage.

Then there's also the bit where "beautiful" women are expected to be impossibly thin, leading to actual health problems like anorexia.

Also

You know, I've never always been a huge fan of anime porn fighting actually. There are comically exaggerated amounts of fluids, the anatomy is odd and doesn't look natural, the sex fight scenes read remarkably similar to the sex fight scenes I wrote when I was a 14 year old virgin (i.e., they don't resemble sex fights in any actual way).

Basically the complains you make could be applied to every type of anime, and I personally consider that a bonus. I don't watch anime expecting realism, I watch it precisely for the exageration like oversized impossibly hard swords penetrating bodies deeper than it should be humanely possible, covering the surrounding walls in vital fluids, and the other person somehow surviving.

I'm not a big fan of completely shaven in 3dpd media either, aesthically I prefer well-groomed (not unkempt 70's bush, but there should be something there). Irl I can usually deal with however she feels most comfortable as long as it's not scratchy.

I prefer shaven, simply because i do not like hairs in my mouth <.<

Stahlseele wrote:I prefer shaven, simply because i do not like hairs in my mouth <.<

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think hairs grow on the bits you put your mouth on when performing oral on a woman. They would have to be very long hairs to cover the clit or the flappity-flaps (which is a medical term), so maybe your aim is just off if you're getting a mouthful of bush?

It's a way bigger issue with dicks. Hairs there are at the base, which the mouth could potentially make contact with during oral. I can't say I've ever had an issue with hair while going down on a woman, but dick hair is a scourge that must be eliminated (or, you know, trimmed back a bit).

Hairs do in fact get in your mouth when going down on a woman. But that is pretty much irrelevant to why shaven pubes took over porn. Shaven pubes happened because it's a filmed medium. Shave the dude's pubes and his dick looks bigger. Shave the lady parts and it's easier to see what's going on. It's not more complicated than that.

The majority of pornography is done with women who have shaved or severely trimmed pubes for the same reason that a lot of porn involves the women taking their underwear off at some point - it's quite hard to see certain structures if there is something opaque on top of them. The end.

-Username17

And, by a feedback effect, once porn with shaved bits started to get popular, it started to catch on in the popular culture. That's why porn in the early 1980s and before looks like a bunch of shaved apes grappling, while in the 1990s and 2000s you get people on television talking about Brazilians and the like.

(Now, it is true historically that some people used to shave their pubes for health reasons - lice were a major problem, among other things - but you don't see merkins in porn.)

@Pseudo-Stupidity
If that is all you put your mouth on, then maybe your aim is a bit too narrow?

So you never kissed somebody on top of their head? Did I miss a memo that hairs are toxic if they come anywhere near one's lips or something?

FrankTrollman wrote:Hairs do in fact get in your mouth when going down on a woman. But that is pretty much irrelevant to why shaven pubes took over porn. Shaven pubes happened because it's a filmed medium. Shave the dude's pubes and his dick looks bigger. Shave the lady parts and it's easier to see what's going on. It's not more complicated than that.

The majority of pornography is done with women who have shaved or severely trimmed pubes for the same reason that a lot of porn involves the women taking their underwear off at some point - it's quite hard to see certain structures if there is something opaque on top of them. The end.

-Username17

But Frank, it's not only the pubes. Armpits, legs, you name it, if it's not on top of the head, they all seem to need to be purged in modern porn. Or has Touhou truly taken over the world and everybody needs to have a good look at that lewd armpit naked skin?

It's not toxic but hair in the mouth definitely cramps the vibe. Not that I'm saying people need to be clean shaven, but like anything in the dating sphere grooming goes well with people.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckB2tE8sYRc

Today I discovered that there are entire channels on YouTube which appear to consist solely of uploads of recorded scrambled cable porn channels from the 90s. Truly, we live in an age of wonders.

With the rise of AI learning, we now can paste 99% believable faces of celebrities onto existing porn. They are called deepfakes.

What an odd turn in the inevitable AI apocalypse.

K wrote:With the rise of AI learning, we now can paste 99% believable faces of celebrities onto existing porn. They are called deepfakes.

What an odd turn in the inevitable AI apocalypse.

I should have seen that one coming. I did not expect to see Twitter, Reddit and PornHub quickly banning it. I'd expect to see Twitter, at least, not actually doing much banning.

Thaluikhain wrote: I should have seen that one coming. I did not expect to see Twitter, Reddit and PornHub quickly banning it. I'd expect to see Twitter, at least, not actually doing much banning.

I wonder if it's just as simple as worrying about litigation. I've seen sites years ago that banned posting of photoshopped stills involving celebrities. That was my assumption back then.

I think banning the deepfakes may be a mistake. This technique, if widely adopted, could be used to dismantle the moralizing attitudes that get people fired from teaching positions for having done porn or had a particularly wild spring break 20 years ago. The "should have kept your clothes on/not posed for naked pictures or video" argument evaporates when doing so is no longer enough to keep nudes of you off the internet. This could even be extended to cover situations where teachers are hesitant to be photographed in circumstances that even imply they may be in the presence of alcohol.

If the fakes are easy enough to make, and hard enough to distinguish, it could create enough plausible deniability around any actual photos of whatever that may surface that we might be able to get past being concerned about what people do in their down time or in private, as a society. Like, I think most people and organizations are going to be too lazy to try and sort out the real from the fake. So, unless you're going to go with the non-functional approach of assuming every photo/video is real and dismissing/judging people as a result, you're pretty much going to have to let all that shit go.

Ideally, we wouldn't care about any of this. But if there were going to be embarrassingly compromising pictures of you on the internet; would you rather that people initially assume they are real, or fake?

Maybe I'm being naively idealistic though.

I dunno, would you rather photos of Richard Spencer flying a Nazi flag be automatically assumed real or automatically assumed fake?

violence in the media wrote:I think banning the deepfakes may be a mistake.

I think soo too.

This technique, if widely adopted, could be used to dismantle the moralizing attitudes that get people fired from teaching positions for having done porn or had a particularly wild spring break 20 years ago.

But not for this reason. I think the banning pushes them into the limelight and will make them more popular.
So some sites banned them. Look at other sites...

And the pornhub ban might be only on paper, not real...
Search for deepfake there and you will find some...