The reason this comes up is because I was reading Imp1 comments and replies to them and he’s mentioned multiple times before that he believes that the actual answer to a lot of this is making artificial wombs so that you can cut out women from making kids and relationships with women have to be about something else. That would mean that since women can't use their wombs as a bargaining tool, their intellect and personalities have to be what keeps a man interested, at least imo, and I can see why it would appeal to him, but are they even reasonable?
I haven't done the research myself and thought it would be more fun to have a discussion over it, but still, I’m just curious as to how the tech works if at all. I've seen things where the tech is being “suppressed” (hidden from the public like a lot of current tech we use today was during the Cold War, ala the internet), but is that true, or not? It's just genuinely an interesting topic to me.
Ah yes, procreation is the manipulation of natural instincts, not pornography.
It's interesting that you think this argument makes sense.
The definition of manipulation literally includes making people make stupid decisions for your benefit. Procreation in the current legal climate is the very definition of that.
It does make sense. The porn industry doesn't rake in billions annually by being scrupulous.
No, they rake in billions by being a way to suppress base desires without ruining your life.
OnlyFans is porn, and I assume you think it has ruined many lives.