What SHOULD constitute as porn in the tv & movie industry, especially softcore?

WARNING: Crude stuff ahead.

I talked about this in a past post, but it bears to be repeated given, as of late, a number of streaming channels releasing tv series containing graphic sex scenes aimed at a mature audience, specifically teenagers.

One criteria:

• TV and movies that have sex scenes with nudity = softcore porn (i.e. Euphoria series, I Know What You Did Last Summer series, The Dreamers), rape scenes not counted.

Not porn:

• Actress who just appears nude, whether topless and/or full-blown but no sex scene = hired stripper (i.e. Halle Barry in Swordfish, Rose Leslie in Game of Thrones, Rosaria Dawson in Westworld)
• Nudity with sex scene on stage = exhibitionist

Of course, there are some exceptions (okay, only one) - Kate Winslet in Titanic as she posed as a model for Leonardo Dicaprio's Jack. This is one scene that actually added to the movie and to the characters.

I have more respect for glamour models, strippers, soft/hardcore porn stars and even OnlyFans amateurs because they don't dress up what they do as "art" or attach some faux intellectual excuse to it. The latter three know they aren't going to get respect from society and they're okay with that; they just do what they do. But actors who strip or agree within their contract to perform nudity + sex scenes, well, they want respect if you disagree with that they're doing.

Out of all those that shed their clothes, the only position I respect for nudity are nude models in art classes. Why? Because what's being done is twofold: use the model as an example of beauty or just "this is the human body", like med students view a cadaver, and to practice the craft of drawing/sketching/sculpting. The end result, if done well, is usually admirers who compliment the artists skill of sketching the nude model, or the wonder of the sculpture made stone or marble resemble skin or soft silk.

Now this begs the question: Why do actors stop at graphic sex scenes? Why not actually just commit to the act of sex then? They'd say that's crossing the line into hardcore porn but so what. There's a decent argument to be made that what happens in Eurphoria is softcore porn, so what's the real different in actually agreeing to have sex with your co-worker? Sure, there's money to be spent on STD tests, before and after, but the porn industry already has that sorted out, so just learn from them. Or, just wear condoms. Everything is the same just like in a hardcore scene except the ejaculation.

But it's as if an actor should actually commit murder if their character kills someone in the script. Not quite. Here's why: People think sex and nudity is a-okay in real life which they are if a-okay means having no eroticism attached to it. Killing someone, not a-okay. Nudity and sex scenes are viewed as some sort of rite of passage with actors; their admires are just waiting for the day that a young actress who just turned 18 will shed their clothes and reveal all. It's a waiting game. It may happen within that year (i.e. Thomasin McKenzie) or it may take more than a decade (i.e. Kate Mara). 

Edit: Paramaters of softcore porn verse hardcore porn. This link confirms my judgement that yes, all of the sex scenes were have seen on tv and on film can be comfortably categorized as softcore. As the link states -

There are specific rules that need to be respected when it comes to making soft porn or hardcore porn videos. Namely, in soft porn, you can rarely (if ever) see the male or female genitalia. There cannot be real oral sex too, so when the male actor goes down on a woman, he usually pulls down to the pubic bone, resting his forehead on it while the woman lifts her leg and braces him with it just enough to cover what’s truly going on. Of course, soft porn is not short of the moans and cries a woman does while real sex happens in the otherwise “normal” sex videos, also known as hardcore porn.

 Now this is what's said about how different hardcore porn is -

While soft porn is more secretive and intimate, hardcore porn leaves nothing hidden and shows the actors entirely from every angle in every pose. Hard porn exposes their genitals, and while in soft porn there cannot be penetration shown, hardcore porn relies on it. The videos also indicate a close-up on oral sex with the man coming on her body. This type of porn has become very popular in the first decade of the 21 st century, and with the internet, it has been booming ever since.

As Irish actress Sarah Bolger puts it regarding on screen nudity -

"With acting and my job, nothing scares me about nakednss.  I wouldn't even think twice if it was right for the script and project," said the Dublin star.

"It's not like I'm making a conscious effort to push the boundaries but I won't ever limit myself in any way.  There is always something new with every opportunity that comes along, you just have to do what you will with that." 

In my view, actors are hired strippers to film/tv as strippers are to a bachelor/bachelorette party.  

Pope Francis

I'll admit, Francy boy is a bad pope. Sure, there are many who have returned to the faith because of his approachability, but overall he does nothing that strengthens the faith. When socially left clerics and religious members like him you can take that as a sign of complete mediocrity. 

Education: Institution Prestige & POCs

 Particularly African-Americans born post 1975. I tend to find them lacking in actual intellectual vigor - not all of course. I can't seem to remember but maybe I addressed it in a past post, but I remember two African-Americans, one whom I believe was half-white, where just based on their CV that their degrees that they sought out were mainly based on public perception of the institution. Case in point of the following two examples.

Case #1

• African-American female
• Attended an Ivy for undergraduate
• Attended an Ivy for doctoral degree 
• After completing her doctoral degree, she lamented that her first academic job, a tenured track job to be exact,  at a small liberal arts college out West wasn't seen as prestigious as the institutions she received her formal education. The college? Colorado College. 

This was, I guess in mid-2015. I checked the department page to see if she was still there but it turns out she wasn't listed. I suppose she used it as a stepping stone for a few years and moved on to a more known institution.

Case #2

• African-American female
• Attended non-Ivy, non-prestigious university for undergrad (DI volleyball scholarship)
• Attended masters at an Ivy (field in which masters was received the wide spread wisdom is to get it at the cheapest program; Ivy name has no real pull)
• Attended doctoral degree at an Ivy (filed in which Phd was received the best schools for it tend to be public institutions)
• Was employed by Ivy institution for first tenured track job; no longer at Ivy institution
• Research interests are equally or better suited within non-Ivy league institutions (i.e. public institutions)

This same prestige/name-brand hunting could be said to be present amongst African-Americans when it comes to medical schools and post-grad residency/fellowships. I think a decent indicator of whether or not the POC (i.e. African-American) is academically sound is if they get into AOA, the medical school  version of Phi Beta Kappa. In places like University of Chicago (Pritzker) med school the African-Americans who have attended in the past four years, only a minority of them were inducted in AOA. Arguments for the lack of POCs, especially African-Americans, is, of course, racism. Unlike that Northwestern study, AMA's own survey is more interesting.

Unpopular Catholic Thought #1

Those who are in the Latin Rite but want to convert to the Eastern Rite are really just rite shopping like Protestants do with their churches. In most cases this isn't about orthodoxy of the priest and/or seeking out a reverent liturgy, but "being drawn to" (whatever that means) Eastern Rites, which, historically, are Orthodoxy. "Being drawn to" is shallow in my mind, at least in the Catholic sense since instead of converting to another religion or denomination one makes a conversion within the Catholic Church. I call these people "meta-converts." Don't like the pope and all the legalism and clericalism of the Latin Rite? Well, I guess I'll seek out the Eastern Rite or even Eastern Orthodoxy. Have issues with the Church's view on NFP? Well I can't consider myself a Catholic anymore and become Orthodoxy instead! Don't like the precision, or imprecision, of a Latin Rite encyclical? Well heck, I'll just go to Orthodoxy cause I don't have to bother with my wannabe philosopher brain nitpicking on what some dead pope said!

If Catholicism is ever driven back underground I wouldn't be surprised if such meta-converts would be absent. When the going gets tough they'll back out. What a bunch of Judases. 

Yes, "not all men."

Modern feminists or those who are tired of the rebuttal of "not all men" are [insert whatever men are being] that is uttered when the supposed patriarchy is the topic are practicing double standards. In fact, it's intellectual dishonesty. 

By using "not all men" modern day feminists are upset that men are being defensive. This is the same upset nature when people throw the "white privilege" card where white men, or even women, become defensive and say that they don't have such privilege. It is believed that by being defensive they are missing the point of what's being said; oddly enough by not understanding and accepting why men are upset modern day feminists skip over the "meet them where they're at" stage that is often practiced in therapy in fields like social work or clinical mental health. 

When people use a race or ethnicity nonchalantly in a critical way as in "black people need to focus more on education" to "black people need to raise their kids in a two parent household"; or even imply it like when Mark Cuban said that AAU basketball, which consists of a majority of black people, need to focus on fundamentals more and less on dunking, there is always a whoa whoa whoa wait a sec, What do you mean black people? or Are you saying that the culture found with AAU is inferior - that's racist. There's a double standard at play and I'm positive that those who accuse others of racism for making blanket statements are aware that the same technique is done to men, especially white men.

It's only fair that non-Woke men who hear blanket statements like "men are disgusting and are sexist", or hear things about the supposed patriarchy, that their emotions get riled up, get defensive and want to defend themselves. After all, their own sex is being criticized. Same thing with saying a white man has "white privilege." If a guy is just shooting the breeze at the local bar and says something like "women are too emotional" no doubt a modern day feminist would say that's an example of sexism and toxic masculinity. Of course, it's a general statement and typical, yes, depending on what country you're in women tend to be more emotional than men. 

Modern feminists want men to understand them yet it appears that the feminists refuse to understand men. It's as if they sorta kinda want men to literally not get upset by any blunt statement or presentation about dominating men and their beliefs. 

What modern feminists refuse to acknowledge is that men are not a monolithic entity, and when talks about patriarchy is brought up they expect men to nod their heads and agree that yes, the patriarchy is horrible. But modern feminists forget to point to an actual patriarchy. What are men to say? What state in what county and in what community? What country? There really isn't any specifics - just vagueness and anecdotal evidence here and there, especially if it's in the US. 

You see, as social liberals see the South and the Midwest as horrific places to live, especially for racial, ethnic and sexual minorities, modern feminists (a demographic within social liberalism) see men, in general, as sexist pigs. It's like when an actual racist in the US sees a black person and says quietly to himself That fuckin' nigger. So yes, I just did equate a modern feminist to an American racist - they share the same hate but just for different parties.

As one can see, the arrow usually goes one way, which has been the norm for the past number of year - give or take the last six or seven. You can utter a critical statement about the supposed patriarchy and  socially conservative beliefs, but you can't do that with certain demographics (i.e. racial and/or ethnic minorities, women, LGBT+) or else. White males are fair game alongside Christians when it comes to criticism, insults and condescension in the mind of modernism.

Evangelical Leaders and their Public Downfalls.

 I suppose it's the same with Catholic priests, but then again the issue with Catholic priests going all socially "progressive" because either they have same-sex attraction themselves or some other sexual disorder doesn't have much of the same effect as a prominent Protesant's fall from grace.

• Jerry Fallwell Jr., the then face of Liberty University, and his wife Becki Tilley's unknown open relationship with a pool boy starting in 2012 that carried on for a few years after the initial meeting. Like really?
• A number of children of Protestant pastors either losing their faith and going to atheism (i.e Abraham Piper) or even making a living as a pornstar.
• A female Protestant pastor in order reconcile with her bisexuality, found more liberal Christian viewpoints but ultimately decided to leave her faith to eventually become a stripper and "life coach" (a most likely unlicensed and self-serving position). Her husband accepted her bisexuality but that wasn't enough - she divorced him (somehow she was able to gain child custody of her three kids as she was reported to laugh about her divorce) since she yearned to make money where being a SAHM (stay at home mom) wasn't financially fulfilling. In one month she made 47k in her new profession. On an old YouTube vid of her preaching a commenter wrote - "She was an exhibitionist before she decided to go professional."
• Protestant youth group leaders turning out to be homosexuals unknowingly to their girlfriends or even wives. I mean, can you not know or suspect? Even if the guy isn't an outright queen or flamboyant there are signs (timber of voice, body language). When a young Jesuit priest came to say his first mass at his home parish his voice sorta-kinda gave away his sexuality. 
• Devout Protestants losing their faith as they learn about deconstructionism, where, logically, they go to agnosticism and then to atheism. These types of atheists are more well-verse in the Bible but also tend to be Gnu Atheists. Or they're ex-conservatives turned atheist in the form of Hunter Avallone (supposedly he was influenced by his wife to leave conservatism). 

Do you see anything that most of these stories have in common? Sex, sexuality and then money. Or as one podcast entitled their episode about the Fallwell Jr. scandal - "In God We Lust." And the influence of women arguably acting as Eve with an apple. 

Differences between UK/Europe and The USA.

UK/Europe: 

• Protests and breaks into private property because fans of a soccer club's wealthy soccer/football owner "abused" the fans/supporters by seriously wanting the club to participate in a closed-system tournament consisting of the most competitive clubs across Europe.
• Protests against police even though their police system is known to have a relatively healthy relationship and perception with and amongst its everyday man, as inspired by police protests and race riots in the US.
• Protests against the US presidents that they don't like, or gives US politicians they don't like the cold shoulder, who visit their country while salivating over US presidents and politicians that they do like.
• Sends out sappy instagram post about staying in the EU i.e. David Beckham. 

Summary: Muh soccer/football. Muh EU. I love the NHS.

USA: 

• Protests and trespasses onto what is technically public property in the form of nation's Capitol building due to what they believe was a corrupted presidential election stolen by the winning party. 
• Protests against police and the jailing industrial complex (as they like to call it) who they believe have been treating minorities and people in general unfairly.
• Doesn't really care what politician visits America with the exception of Kim Jong-un.
• Broke away from what was considered at the time the world's superpower to form its own country to later overtake the unofficial title of world superpower. 

Summary: Muh fairness and government integrity. Muh social justice. Eagle says cacaaawww!