Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
About Deviant Member DragonsNapalmMale/United States Recent Activity
Deviant for 2 Years
Needs Premium Membership
Statistics 0 Deviations 146 Comments 2,164 Pageviews

Newest Deviations

No deviations yet.

Favourites

Watchers

Groups

This user is not currently part of any groups.

Activity


I spoke with someone on here who was an avid feminist a while ago, and they were rather opposed to pornography, as many feminists are.

They described work as an actress in adult entertainment as a demeaning job, one where a person is being thoroughly exploited by their very profession, even if they enjoy their job/consent to their job expectations/are well paid for their job.

I drew to comparisons to the most demeaning job I ever had, which was working as a janitor during my first year of college. Specifically, I worked part time cleaning low-rent houses/apartments after people moved out of them... and since the people who lived in them were often poor, this usually meant they either skipped town in lieu of paying their rent or were evicted. Needless to say, there was always a lot to clean up and it was seldom what you'd call a "paper mess". I'll spare you the details, but let it be said that many powerful cleaning products were needed (like engine degreaser), and you'd be a fool not to take a shower or eat with your hands after working.

I'm curious: who is the more exploited person? A woman who has sex on camera for money and enjoys (or at least is reasonably content with) her job, or a person who has to spend a full day (sometimes two) cleaning a house who merely tolerates it?

For the record, I'm not complaining; I did my work, got paid, and got a better job as soon as I could have. That was years ago, and I don't regret any of it.
I'm curious. What's yours?

Mine was with a Christian, on the topic if Old Testament violence:
"Yeah, you say god committed genocide, but in leading people away from him, you commit genocide of the soul. The body is temporary, but the soul isn't."
-
In short, you can do whatever act of violence you can think of in life (genocide, infanticide, etc.) and it's not as bad as being an atheist.
Why is this important? Why does anyone even care about trying to draw lines in the sand when it comes to objectivity or subjectivity?

I don't know any religious scripture that dictates morality on every single moral issue that comes across humanity, and although I've asked others to demonstrate how it would, no one's ever accomplished this.

As such, this tells me that there really isn't an objective moral standard for the modern human being to follow, or if there are objective morals, they're only objective to an extent, covering some issues, but not others, leaving them open to interpretation and rationalization.
For this reason, I find it somewhat paradoxical to question someone else's morals on the grounds that they're "subjective". Those without religion or philosophy to follow don't have purely objective morals. But then again, so do theists and students of philosophy.
Also, from a functional standard, do either of these things matter? Does whether a person follow an objective or subjective morality affect them as human beings?

deviantID

DragonsNapalm
United States

AdCast - Ads from the Community

Comments


Add a Comment:
 
:iconjvartndesign:
JVartndesign Featured By Owner Jun 23, 2013  Professional General Artist
hello
Reply
:icondragonsnapalm:
DragonsNapalm Featured By Owner Jun 23, 2013
Hi there. :)
Reply
:iconenjuvarue:
enjuvarue Featured By Owner May 15, 2013  Professional Digital Artist
thanks so much for the fav :glomp:
Reply
:icondragonsnapalm:
DragonsNapalm Featured By Owner May 17, 2013
Don't mention it. Thanks for good work. :)
Reply
Add a Comment: