Forgot to acknowledge this earlier. i’ll look these over
Well, since it takes two sessions for her to get the 10K, if you make the switch AFTER the first session (that is, while she’s still recovering), you’ll probably be in a better position to fool her with a ringer…
Did I say that in my out-loud voice? Oops.
Dude, you TOTALLY should have told the denitst to turn on a camera, keep drilling, and knock a grand off your bill.
Ooh, that’s a good one. Only agree to accompany her if Duke comes along.
I have asked you repeatedly to leave the Evil!Skald helmet alone. Evil is not a toy.
I don’t want any particular answer from anyone. the question isn’t whether whether the whipping shoot is going to be traumatic. It’s what people will do to help a friend avoid a bad experience the friend has consented to. The tension as I see it is between respecting the friend’s agency and protecting the friend.
Clearly you don’t think the whipping shoot is a necessarily bad or traumatic thing. That’s fine. I could have written the hypo with a more graphic description, but I preferred not to put such images into anybody’s head.
The problem is that you are assuming that bondage modeling is something only masochists or the truly desperate would do, and then only for ridiculous amounts of money. This is a real job that real non masochistic models do all the time, it’s not degrading or desperate.
It’s not degrading to you. .It’s degrading to some
You wouldn’t have to be desperate to do it. Some people would.
I understand that you disagree. But look at it this way. I am willing to accept that what I find debasing is acceptable to you. Can’t you concede the reverse?
For a lot of people, sex s a very intimate and very private thing. Just as it would be arrogant of me to say that a person who engages in porn or BDSM and claims to be fine with it must be lying, I think it is at the very least insenstive to say that a person is puritanical to be repulsed by the idea of having sex on film or silly to be afraid of being whipped for pay.
There’s a big difference in the amount of trauma people experience between being involuntarily subjected to something icky and willingly agreeing to something icky. It’s the surprise, betrayal, and helplessness that cause the emotional damage. I doubt agreeing to a painful thing you get paid for will cause any more trauma than agreeing to undergo an unpleasant medical procedure, something many people do.
Not really, no - note that the “nope” had nothing to do with the causal circumstances. The commentary about dogs was just additional info.
No, but what you described isn’t all BDSM porn, only a particular exploitative variant. I have no problem with BDSM porn that is consensual even if presented as not, and not pegged around being really real. The BDSM stuff I have seen (It’s really not my thing, very little current porn is, but I believe in having broad experiences) all seemed to end with a mini-interview of the involved woman, making it very clear it was just a scene. The stuff I watched also involved adult actresses I’d seen in other, more mainstream, porn and interviews about porn and related stuff, like Stoya.
I meant specifically the porn production you had in your OP. I have no problem with the “have sex for money” paradigm, I have a problem with the “will do something you don’t actually want to do because you need the money” paradigm. I’d have just as much problem with hobo-fighting rings or some other exploitation of desperate people. In my research, most modern porn does not involve that sort of exploitation - most actresses don’t seem to be in it to buy enough food to stay alive or keep their parents on dialysis or somesuch, at any rate.
Oh, and I was using the “dogs are not people” paragraph to explain why I would not pay for Duke myself, even if I thought Emma would take the money. That part of the answer would be different if it was a human, but the parts relating to Emma wouldn’t.
But there wouldn’t actually be much to show on a film. You would have a few minutes of me tightly gripping the armrests of the chair and not moving, not something that most people are going to pay a lot of money to see. And if people want to see that, you could just hire an aspiring actor for next to nothing, use a fake drill, and have as much film as you want of some dude tightly gripping a chair and holding still for a fraction of the cost. Or if you want wild crazy reactions, again use an aspiring actor and fake drill and tell the actor to thrash around and make noise whenever the drill is on - the famous drilling scene from Marathon Man didn’t involve actual dental work but was certainly convincing.
The problem I have is not with ‘graphicness’, it’s that you made a specific (non-graphic) description of the scenario, and are now trying to change it and being vague about what is even involved. The original scenario said that she’d be ‘whipped’ and that injuries from it would not prompt a visit to the ER or even a doctor, and that she could safeword out at any time. But now you’re talking about it like it’s something inherently hugely traumatic, and have made vague references to other (apparently non-whipping) techniques that, while unspecified, will cause extreme, automatic-trauma pain without risking enough injury to warrant a doctor’s visit, and will cause the emotional trauma so quickly there’s no chance for her to safeword out of it.
I’m not sure what activity you’re hinting at that is extremely emotionally traumatic for someone voluntarily having it done who can safeword out of it, looks good enough on film to be sold for profit, won’t cause even a doctor’s visit in the aftermath, and films better ‘for real’ rather than just faked. I know a lot of people who would jump on the deal as originally described, because getting a big chunk of cash for an unpleasant but not uncontrolled weekend is a pretty sweet deal, and people routinely endure worse for less money. I doubt that hypothetical dog lady is going to have a worse time in her couple of shoots than people who live with chronic pain deal with routinely, for example.
Pantastic, re-read the OP. It says nothing about Emma being allowed to use a afe word.It isn’t even promised that she won’t bleed or be bruised. This is deliberate. She does not have that escape hatch.
I can think of several ways to subject a person to agonizing torment that nevertheless would not necessitate an ER visit or doctor’s call. Hell, even the fact that the term “doctor” is used allows some wiggle room, as a nurse or EMT or PA can handle a lot. There are plenty of areas on the human body that are non-vital and yet extremely sensitive to pain…
And of course the Skeevy Fellow could be lying. Why would you trust a person who likes to hurt people who specifically don’t like pain?
I wasn’t willing to go into a blow-by-blow of what awaits Emma should she do the shoot because it really didn’t seem necessary. The specifics of the torture arenn’t teh point; it’s whether posters would be willing to help a desperate friend in a way they found extremely disturbing, and whether they felt their superior judgment should override Emma’s right to self-determination when that right was putting her in peril
You should have just said “porn” if you wanted it understood that you were talking about something most people would not be ok with instead of trying to turn a regular job into a scene from Saw.
I’ve never seen SAW, so I can’t say much about that–except that, if I understad correctly, the people in that movie actually get killed, don’t they?
I daresay that if I had just said “porn” you’d still be complaining, becauseyou seem offended by the notion some people find doing such things degrading when you do not.
The only thing i found offensive was your assumption that the only reasons for doing it are desperation or masochism, that is all.
What self determination? She’s economically co-erced and psychologically damaged.
Many people are economically coerced into taking jobs they hate. Many people are psychologically damaged. What gives you the right to determine that she does not have a the right to make her own decisions?
Note that this is a different question than whether you’d go to the shoot with her.
I would try to dissuade Emma from doing the shoot, and if I had the money would lend or give it to her. If that failed I would accompany her to the shoot, because I’d prefer the discomfort of seeing it happen to the worry of not knowing she was safe. But I wouldn’t feel free to try to stop her from doing a legal activitity to solve her probem. To me that is similar in kind (though certainly not in degree) to the sin hte Skeevy Fellow plans to commit and which her mother actually committed…
I am not God. People have the right to do things to themselves even if I think they are unwise.
And I disagree with both of those being used to exploit those groups.
Sorry if I misphrased that - it’s not that I don’t think she has the right, she’s an adult, it’s that I think the person taking advantage of her circumstances shouldn’t have the right to.
I wouldn’t. especially not her doing something that would trigger me, itself.
I’ve said nothing about trying to stop her (physically, I take it you mean)
I disagree - intent matters for this type of thing.
I take it you disagree with all involuntary psychiatric committal as well, then?