Why do users here care about bans? Like just make a new account lmfao

I’m saying consequentialism is necessary to successfully interact with a system of practical material prescriptions

Ok lets use consequentialism. Goal : Decommodify the economy and provide free stuff to people. Action : Pirate everything, including porn. Consequence : Some people lose their livelihood, most people gain. So it is morally acceptable to pirate everything.

You’re trying so desperately to cling to something to be right about, but it’s not gonna happen.

Pure projection. I'm not the one writing essays about a minor point that is irrelevant to the main argument. I didn't even realize you agreed with me that OF users are petit-bourgs. I see no further reason to argue about whether a body can be MOP or not.

Removed by mod

The idea that consequentialism is right itself is predicated on the belief that "ends justify means". There is no material basis here.

Yes, you are right about doctors and lawyers. Similarly, for online sex-workers the MOP are cameras, internet, sex toys and their BODY (not labor, but the physical object of their body). Sex-workers who perform physical sex-work are not petit-bourg, as Marx himself clearly said. Marx classified those as lumpen.

You still haven't explained why pirating games or movies is morally acceptable.

I'm specifically talking about porn. Obviously my argument would make no sense when it comes to physical sex work, as you can't pirate that.

I'm sorry but you'll probably be one of the greatest philosophers of all time if you think you have found a material basis to morality. Until then, Marxist-tinged or not, morality is still an idealist affair.

I am a communist. The act of piracy will have almost no effect on the socialist project. I have no idea why you're bringing that up.

Piracy harms the person making content, true. Not pirating harms the buyer who has to part with their hard-earned money for something that can technically be replicated at zero cost, this is also true.

You haven't actually explained why it is morally acceptable to pirate games or movies.

EDIT: What is the MOP that petit-bourgs such as independently practising doctors or lawyers use? Your understanding of MOP is flawed.

I think you're the only person in this thread who has made a reasonable argument. The opportunity cost of a pirated copy translates to a fraction of a cent per worker, while for an amateur porn-maker it's the whole $10-15. So I guess that's why pirating from large corps is not that bad, compared to indie game, film or song makers. So both are equally bad in the moral sense, but in terms of material harm, it's much smaller for workers of large corps.

Alright, I agree with everything you said. Now use the exact same argument, and tell me why pirating against the consent of game-devs or film crew is fine.

How are those two things contradictory? Producing and selling porn is no different from making and selling other media. So IF it is wrong to pirate sex-work, it is wrong to pirate other stuff too. You cannot place porn above other things. This argument does not depend on mine or your opinion on the morality of piracy.

Bro involuntary porn is something that someone never wants anyone to see. When you are literally selling your porn, that is no longer involuntary porn.

Yeah let's delete threads based on arbitrary judgements of grossness, necessity and false accusations. The question of piracy itself is very minor and irrelevant to real world issues. I just made this thread because I noticed a funny moral hypocrisy amongst leftists.

It's said that Marx laughed whenever people talked to him about morality. Giving the moral question context does not make it a material analysis. All normative philosophy is idealist. Anyway, I'm only saying this because you called me an idealist as if your analysis is somehow a materialist analysis. We are both engaged in idealism.

Anyway enough with the philosophical essays. The commodity 'porn' is produced using the means of production 'human body, sex toys etc'. Labor is the actual work of making porn. Labor such as factory labor or farm labor produce commodities like cars or wheat, and the means of production are 'factory' and 'farm'. There is no confusion here. Sex-workers own their means of production.

Finally, there are laws against publishing nonconsensual pornography called revenge porn laws. But onlyfans is consensual pornography, and only IP laws apply to their free distribution. So it is wrong to use the argument "you are distributing against their consent", as if the same doesn't apply to movies or games.

In a world without IP laws, the world that you want to see, those who want to pay for something can pay while those who want to pirate can pirate.

The same applies for any porn produced in such a world. So you basically agree with me. How would you stop people from pirating porn without IP laws?

Discussions of morality are idealist by definition. The only material argument here is that all forms of piracy is exploitation(in the material Marxist sense).

Personally, I don't care if either video games or porn is pirated. I just want people to understand that both are the same, and you are being hypocritical if you pirate one but claim that pirating the other is bad.

OnlyFans people and independent prostitutes do own their means of production : their own bodies.

Bro without IP laws, almost no company would get as big as they are and employ as many people as they do. The very employment of millions of workers depend on IP laws. You are trying to minimize the effect of piracy on other workers for some weird reason.

If you don't want your nudes seen by the world, don't post it on the internet. It's that simple.

If IP is a sham, then making money from porn is also a sham. It doesn't matter if the porn comes from a major studio or an independent creator on OnlyFans. Just like it wouldn't matter if the movie is an indie movie or a Disney Production.

I agree that people have the right to their bodies of course, but people do not actually have a right to the images of their body. I'm not saying in a moral sense, but it literally the law that people are not entitled to images or videos of them.

I'm not against sex work, although I won't lose sleep if a woman who makes $10k per month gets her porn pirated. Self-employed people are petit-bourg by definition. You're completely missing my point in my OP, maybe because my main question is worded poorly. I am saying that if pirating OnlyFans is bad, then so is all other forms of piracy that involves a loss of revenue.

Do the employees of movie production companies or game companies also not deserve the product of their labor? You say they're big companies, sure that's true. But those massive companies also employ massive amounts of people who depend on IP laws for their very survival.

I didn't acknowledge your main point because I agree with it. I'm just saying that IF that's true, then piracy of all other forms is equally bad and leftists shouldn't do that either.

I think it's not accurate to call pirating porn "sexual assault". Like that makes zero sense to me. It's just porn. You make a product and you want to sell it. But since your product can be replicated infinitely at zero cost, it makes no sense to pay for it.

I'm not saying that pirating porn is good or bad, I'm saying it is fundamentally the same as pirating anything else.

If you post something on the internet for public access, it is implicit that the entire world can access it. Also the people losing from piracy are not millionaire actors, but the underpaid game-devs, film crew, artists etc.

Almost any argument made against this also applies to other types of piracy. There is infinite free games and movies too.

I'm just tired of sex-work being placed on a pedestal above other types of work. A game-designer or a best boy who work their asses off also lose from piracy, but somehow a woman who simply shows tits and ass is more exploited than them?

My point is, either all forms of piracy are bad, or none are.