planetf1.com

It is currently Sun Dec 16, 2018 3:03 am

All times are UTC


Forum rules






Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 7:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:24 am
Posts: 2202
Tufty wrote:
Banana Man wrote:
Seriously though, I don't think porn encourages sex as such.

Aye, but looking from a parental perspective, would you want your kids, say about 10-17, browsing porn?


10 is a bit young, but teenagers, i.e. 13 and upwards I'd just consider it normal.

When I was 13 I knew people in my year who had already lost their virginity. Not many and I certainly don't agree with it but children that age really aren't naive about the birds and the bees. By then you've already been in secondary school a good 2 or 3 years and are probably wondering why you keep looking at that 6th form girl's pickle.

Even if you are against it, advertising isn't really making things worse. If you can't find porn on the internet then God help you.

_________________
I remember when this website was all fields.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 7:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 25, 2005 9:51 pm
Posts: 32
sandman1347 wrote:
This current Formula 2 series is a pointless joke that will never get anyone to F1. I'm pleasantly surprised by the continued success of the GP2 program. It has sustained itself for close to a decade now. It's run is beginning to rival that of F3000.


Looks like GP2 is on the wane now though. Most of the best drivers seem to be heading to FRenault 3.5 this season, as GP2 is too expensive. The FIA really needs to start getting a grip on the junior formulae, there are far too many for it to be sustainable.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 7:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 2:56 am
Posts: 1215
Ok people, choose, do you want:

a. Tobacco sponsorship
or
b. Porn sponsorhip

?

I think some viewers are perhaps way too puritan. I'd put DUREX advertisement on the HRT cars because... "nice guys finish last". And Pedro de la Rosa is certainly a nice guy.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 8:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2011 1:59 pm
Posts: 5233
flavio81 wrote:
Ok people, choose, do you want:

a. Tobacco sponsorship
or
b. Porn sponsorhip

?

I think some viewers are perhaps way too puritan. I'd put DUREX advertisement on the HRT cars because... "nice guys finish last". And Pedro de la Rosa is certainly a nice guy.

Well, I'm a smoker who watches porn! I don't think either is down to advertising!

But I do think it gives a message advertising condoms with HRT it's not so much "nice guys finish last" as "you won't arrive as quickly"

_________________
There is no theory of evolution, just a list of animals that Chuck Norris allows to live.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 8:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 1:38 pm
Posts: 2555
Well, Playboy has been sponsoring Matthias Dolderer of Red Bull Air Race for some time..

Image

Image

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 9:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 3:41 pm
Posts: 133
I'm guessing that this is normal in Germany.....
http://www.supercars.net/Pics?viewPic=y ... pID=864336


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 10:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:09 pm
Posts: 1117
DOLOMITE wrote:
well there's one driver who doesn't complain about sponsor days...


Image

check out his "cockpit"

Is the top of his helmet like Schumi's? Pretty sad that the series allows this kind of sponsorship. Though the driver must be pleased with sponsor events...

_________________
米克尔 科琳娜 吉娜 米克
Keep Fighting Michael!


Ciao Jules


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 10:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:33 pm
Posts: 1963
Location: Colwyn Bay, North Wales
Banana Man wrote:
Tufty wrote:
Banana Man wrote:
Seriously though, I don't think porn encourages sex as such.

Aye, but looking from a parental perspective, would you want your kids, say about 10-17, browsing porn?


10 is a bit young, but teenagers, i.e. 13 and upwards I'd just consider it normal.

When I was 13 I knew people in my year who had already lost their virginity. Not many and I certainly don't agree with it but children that age really aren't naive about the birds and the bees. By then you've already been in secondary school a good 2 or 3 years and are probably wondering why you keep looking at that 6th form girl's pickle.

Even if you are against it, advertising isn't really making things worse. If you can't find porn on the internet then God help you.

Agreed personally, and teenage yes, but kids are good with computers these days.

_________________
Organiser of the single most low-tech Robot Wars tournament in history, PM for details!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 10:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 8:34 pm
Posts: 87
If you lot think that Live Strip.com is a porn site, then you really, really need to start looking at non F1 related stuff on the intenet


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 11:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 5:19 pm
Posts: 1172
Location: Los Angeles, California
MistaVega23 wrote:
Nevermind the porn who told Pommer it's ok to use Schumi's 7 stars on top of his helmet? 8O



BLASPHEMY!! :-P

_________________
"No, there is no terrible way to win. There is only winning."
Jean-Pierre Sarti


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2012 1:00 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 2:55 pm
Posts: 179
Amon wrote:
edpenguin wrote:
It's not really an issue of being offended by it, surely. It's that porn is for losers . . . a bit like F2 at the moment it would seem.

What's the implication . . . that all F2 viewers are w**nk*rs ?


That's a pretty bold assumption to make. There sure must be a lot of losers in this world according to your so open minded opinion.


Every man in the world is a loser. :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2012 2:23 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 3:09 am
Posts: 29
that's almost as bad as these sponsors

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2012 2:40 am 
In 2001 the NASCAR driver Dale Earnhardt Jr was sponsored by both Budweiser and Remington. Guns AND alcohol?


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2012 9:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 10:31 am
Posts: 4
Amon wrote:
edpenguin wrote:
It's not really an issue of being offended by it, surely. It's that porn is for losers . . . a bit like F2 at the moment it would seem.

What's the implication . . . that all F2 viewers are w**nk*rs ?


That's a pretty bold assumption to make. There sure must be a lot of losers in this world according to your so open minded opinion.


There have been quite a few replies here re my comment "porn is for losers". Actually, it's worse than that. Porn, imho, does not enhance or improve sex but progressively erodes and malforms it. For those who have the time and inclination to at least consider this and other damaging possibilities of porn, here's a brief list of links and comments, the first of which I would think should prove most useful:

1. Raquel Welch: the ‘era of porn’ has ‘annihilated’ men - article here: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/raquel-welch-the-era-of-porn-has-annihilated-men
2. (re Hugh Hefner) All Porn Is Gay - article here: http://www.henrymakow.com/001421.html
3. Pornography Toxicity - http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/2005/12/senate_subcommi.html
[Number four removed by mod due to inappropriate content]

One last observation. Porn actresses and actors are often preyed upon; their lives often end in ruin and many die by their own hand. For those who want stats on this aspect see here : http://www.thepinkcross.org/ In these cases they are, literally, losers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2012 10:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:33 pm
Posts: 9898
Location: Travelling around the world
edpenguin wrote:
Amon wrote:
edpenguin wrote:
It's not really an issue of being offended by it, surely. It's that porn is for losers . . . a bit like F2 at the moment it would seem.

What's the implication . . . that all F2 viewers are w**nk*rs ?


That's a pretty bold assumption to make. There sure must be a lot of losers in this world according to your so open minded opinion.


There have been quite a few replies here re my comment "porn is for losers". Actually, it's worse than that. Porn, imho, does not enhance or improve sex but progressively erodes and malforms it. For those who have the time and inclination to at least consider this and other damaging possibilities of porn, here's a brief list of links and comments, the first of which I would think should prove most useful:

1. Raquel Welch: the ‘era of porn’ has ‘annihilated’ men - article here: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/raquel-welch-the-era-of-porn-has-annihilated-men
2. (re Hugh Hefner) All Porn Is Gay - article here: http://www.henrymakow.com/001421.html
3. Pornography Toxicity - http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/2005/12/senate_subcommi.html
4. Sex Plague - http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Darkmoon-Sex-Plague.html

One last observation. Porn actresses and actors are often preyed upon; their lives often end in ruin and many die by their own hand. For those who want stats on this aspect see here : http://www.thepinkcross.org/ In these cases they are, literally, losers.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Everything has its extremes. Take alcohol for example. There are those who enjoy a casual beer (I enjoy mine while watching F1 races with friends). Then there are those who allow it to destroy their health, their relationships, their families and so on. I would not classify everybody who drinks alcohol as a loser.

Having a browse on Google for a look at some bare t**s doesn't need to become a psychology debate.

_________________
I don't rely entirely on God
ImageImage
I rely on Prost



FA#14


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2012 4:15 pm 
Maybe this topic should be moved to "Off Topic", it seems to have evolved into the perpetual argument on whether children and teens should be exposed to sex.

Personally, I believe that appropriate education is the best way to help teens make the transition from childhood into adulthood. I was a teen back in the 60's and you would not believe how many urban legends, misinformation, and ignorance of sex surrounded me. But I also know that I did not need porn to get horny, my raging hormones provided all the motivation I needed. I also believe that if I had the internet while I was a teen nothing would have stood in my way of finding about this kind of stuff, if I wished. These days kids are very clever and resourceful in finding ways around mommy's parental controls.

As far as being a porn star is a road that usually leads to ruin, I cannot dispute that. Young men and women, lured by easy cash fall prey to the lure of this industry. Then, once the bloom of youth withers away, they wind up jobless, ostracized, and usually out of cash. But are they "losers" or just victims who made poor decisions? I have to suspect more young people who decided to smoke crack and wound up in the morgue outnumber dead porn stars by a large margin.

Hmm, I did a little peek, and apparently 400,000 children are born addicted to crack each year, in the USA, and 7 users die every day.

The road from childhood to adulthood is littered with traps and obstacles, and guidance, patience, love and education are tools that are required to make sure they don't go down the wrong road. Putting up walls and fostering denial and ignorance won't help.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2012 9:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 8:16 pm
Posts: 86
Mr-E wrote:
Well, Playboy has been sponsoring Matthias Dolderer of Red Bull Air Race for some time..



Penthouse sponsored Hesketh racing in F1 in 1976!

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 3:59 pm
Posts: 15
Location: England
THEY HARD PORN IN 1976?!?!

_________________
ENGLAND


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Mar 23, 2012 11:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 6:25 pm
Posts: 186
edpenguin wrote:
It's not really an issue of being offended by it, surely. It's that porn is for losers . . . a bit like F2 at the moment it would seem.

What's the implication . . . that all F2 viewers are w**nk*rs ?


Denial this strong can only mean one thing ;)

_________________
Forza Ferrari


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 12:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2010 3:07 pm
Posts: 524
edpenguin wrote:
Amon wrote:
edpenguin wrote:
It's not really an issue of being offended by it, surely. It's that porn is for losers . . . a bit like F2 at the moment it would seem.

What's the implication . . . that all F2 viewers are w**nk*rs ?


That's a pretty bold assumption to make. There sure must be a lot of losers in this world according to your so open minded opinion.


There have been quite a few replies here re my comment "porn is for losers". Actually, it's worse than that. Porn, imho, does not enhance or improve sex but progressively erodes and malforms it. For those who have the time and inclination to at least consider this and other damaging possibilities of porn, here's a brief list of links and comments, the first of which I would think should prove most useful:

1. Raquel Welch: the ‘era of porn’ has ‘annihilated’ men - article here: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/raquel-welch-the-era-of-porn-has-annihilated-men
2. (re Hugh Hefner) All Porn Is Gay - article here: http://www.henrymakow.com/001421.html
3. Pornography Toxicity - http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/2005/12/senate_subcommi.html
4. Sex Plague - http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Darkmoon-Sex-Plague.html

One last observation. Porn actresses and actors are often preyed upon; their lives often end in ruin and many die by their own hand. For those who want stats on this aspect see here : http://www.thepinkcross.org/ In these cases they are, literally, losers.

The occidentalobserver.net? Seriously? That is an anti jewish article and the entire site is advocating while supremecy under a thin veil of so called intellectualism. Strange choice of material, very strange.

_________________
Always finish what you


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 9:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:44 am
Posts: 287
Nephilist wrote:
edpenguin wrote:
Amon wrote:
edpenguin wrote:
It's not really an issue of being offended by it, surely. It's that porn is for losers . . . a bit like F2 at the moment it would seem.

What's the implication . . . that all F2 viewers are w**nk*rs ?


That's a pretty bold assumption to make. There sure must be a lot of losers in this world according to your so open minded opinion.


There have been quite a few replies here re my comment "porn is for losers". Actually, it's worse than that. Porn, imho, does not enhance or improve sex but progressively erodes and malforms it. For those who have the time and inclination to at least consider this and other damaging possibilities of porn, here's a brief list of links and comments, the first of which I would think should prove most useful:

1. Raquel Welch: the ‘era of porn’ has ‘annihilated’ men - article here: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/raquel-welch-the-era-of-porn-has-annihilated-men
2. (re Hugh Hefner) All Porn Is Gay - article here: http://www.henrymakow.com/001421.html
3. Pornography Toxicity - http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/2005/12/senate_subcommi.html
4. Sex Plague - http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/authors/Darkmoon-Sex-Plague.html

One last observation. Porn actresses and actors are often preyed upon; their lives often end in ruin and many die by their own hand. For those who want stats on this aspect see here : http://www.thepinkcross.org/ In these cases they are, literally, losers.

The occidentalobserver.net? Seriously? That is an anti jewish article and the entire site is advocating while supremecy under a thin veil of so called intellectualism. Strange choice of material, very strange.


Also, looks like Dr Judith Reisman has an agenda rather than coming from an unbiased point of view. The article was really badly written. She mentions research that backs up her view yet doesn't reference it properly. Why is that? Could it be that it doesn't actually exist? Anyone who writes psychological papers knows that all references to previous research have to be correctly attributed to the author of the paper quoted.

My partner did her psychology doctorate dissertation on pornography and managed to use the evidence available to state that porn did no harm to adult users unless they were addicted, which as other posters have stated is just like alcohol, or chocolate. All things in moderation, and all that.

My partner and I have a varied and interesting sex life (although its not as wild since we had kids) and have used porn together, in groups and singly. Neither of us has ever had sex with children or animals as was suggested would happen in one of the articles that was linked. I also don't let my kids use the internet without parental controls and supervision.

Personally, I'm much more worried by having overly skinny models on the front of magazines, leading young girls to try and look like them even though its normally unhealthy or the model has been airbrushed. And, what makes it worse is that its only an 'ideal' for women to look like that in the fashion world, where most of the style decisions are made by gay men.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Mar 24, 2012 9:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:44 am
Posts: 287
Blinky McSquinty wrote:
Maybe this topic should be moved to "Off Topic", it seems to have evolved into the perpetual argument on whether children and teens should be exposed to sex.

Personally, I believe that appropriate education is the best way to help teens make the transition from childhood into adulthood. I was a teen back in the 60's and you would not believe how many urban legends, misinformation, and ignorance of sex surrounded me. But I also know that I did not need porn to get horny, my raging hormones provided all the motivation I needed. I also believe that if I had the internet while I was a teen nothing would have stood in my way of finding about this kind of stuff, if I wished. These days kids are very clever and resourceful in finding ways around mommy's parental controls.

As far as being a porn star is a road that usually leads to ruin, I cannot dispute that. Young men and women, lured by easy cash fall prey to the lure of this industry. Then, once the bloom of youth withers away, they wind up jobless, ostracized, and usually out of cash. But are they "losers" or just victims who made poor decisions? I have to suspect more young people who decided to smoke crack and wound up in the morgue outnumber dead porn stars by a large margin.

Hmm, I did a little peek, and apparently 400,000 children are born addicted to crack each year, in the USA, and 7 users die every day.

The road from childhood to adulthood is littered with traps and obstacles, and guidance, patience, love and education are tools that are required to make sure they don't go down the wrong road. Putting up walls and fostering denial and ignorance won't help.


You shouldn't be on an internet forum. That's a far too intelligent and well-reasoned argument. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 3:41 pm
Posts: 482
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Quote:
would you want your kids, say about 10-17, browsing porn?

Well, Durex was a sponsor for the F1 many years...try to explain your motor-maniac kid what Durex does, you'll be sure to have a headache.
And yes, compared with tobacco/alcohol commercials and the results of consumming those products, I would very much want my (future) kid to browse for porn instead of seeing him with a Marlboro and a Johnnie Walker (which can be clearly seen on the McLarens).

_________________
Olivier Panis fan.
...and also Jenson Button fan.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 6:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2008 1:16 am
Posts: 1308
F108 wrote:
HamsterHuey wrote:
edpenguin wrote:
It's not really an issue of being offended by it, surely. It's that porn is for losers . . . a bit like F2 at the moment it would seem.

What's the implication . . . that all F2 viewers are w**nk*rs ?

:lol: . Thanks for the laugh. I'm surprised you have the courage to get on the internet. The thought that porn might be lurking around, just one click away on any site must be pretty terrifying.



:lol: :lol:

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 11:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 4:33 pm
Posts: 1963
Location: Colwyn Bay, North Wales
ATM2 wrote:
Quote:
would you want your kids, say about 10-17, browsing porn?

Well, Durex was a sponsor for the F1 many years...try to explain your motor-maniac kid what Durex does, you'll be sure to have a headache.
And yes, compared with tobacco/alcohol commercials and the results of consumming those products, I would very much want my (future) kid to browse for porn instead of seeing him with a Marlboro and a Johnnie Walker (which can be clearly seen on the McLarens).

Fair point on the second part, but I'd expect parents generally would rather want their kids to sit down and ask them about the facts of life than find out from seeing it on the internet.

_________________
Organiser of the single most low-tech Robot Wars tournament in history, PM for details!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 8:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 3:41 pm
Posts: 482
Location: Bucharest, Romania
A parent will probably want that, but fact is that they're never (or almost never)ready to start this discussion at the right time. With all this information available , kids these days are starting to get aware of the more mature parts of life much sooner than we did. I'm pretty sure a 11-year old knows what porn is (more or less) - at 11 years old, I was still kicking the ball in the schoolyard, and I was still looking at girls as hair pulling devices with cooties. Times change...

_________________
Olivier Panis fan.
...and also Jenson Button fan.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 11:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 3:41 pm
Posts: 735
Location: Worthing England.
edpenguin wrote:
Amon wrote:
edpenguin wrote:
It's not really an issue of being offended by it, surely. It's that porn is for losers . . . a bit like F2 at the moment it would seem.

What's the implication . . . that all F2 viewers are w**nk*rs ?


That's a pretty bold assumption to make. There sure must be a lot of losers in this world according to your so open minded opinion.


There have been quite a few replies here re my comment "porn is for losers". Actually, it's worse than that. Porn, imho, does not enhance or improve sex but progressively erodes and malforms it. For those who have the time and inclination to at least consider this and other damaging possibilities of porn, here's a brief list of links and comments, the first of which I would think should prove most useful:

1. Raquel Welch: the ‘era of porn’ has ‘annihilated’ men - article here: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/raquel-welch-the-era-of-porn-has-annihilated-men
2. (re Hugh Hefner) All Porn Is Gay - article here: http://www.henrymakow.com/001421.html
3. Pornography Toxicity - http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/2005/12/senate_subcommi.html
[Number four removed by mod due to inappropriate content]

One last observation. Porn actresses and actors are often preyed upon; their lives often end in ruin and many die by their own hand. For those who want stats on this aspect see here : http://www.thepinkcross.org/ In these cases they are, literally, losers.
Well i used to run a little business with my old man filming couples and editing them ect so they had a DVD to take away, after a while we started getting calls from people we did work for asking if we would join in (you would be suprised how many husbands want to watch their wife) i never took part in this but my father did, at the end of it all my father married a girl younger than me and i married an awesome woman and my sex life is epic, so try and be a little open minded eh?

Also Porn stars know the risk, big paid jobs carry risks and thats a choice they take, i agree that a lot of stars have ended up in a bad way but not all of them do, its a risk they accept.

here is a site that lists a lot of stars with their causes of death.

http://danielrjennings.org/TheAverageLi ... nStar.html

A lot of these stars live the high life and get dependant on drugs, now i'm not saying that none of them get pushed onto them
but you can bet that a lot do it because they want to, its the same with musicians, in fact you can read the causes of death and believe that it was musicians if you didn't know better.

_________________
ImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group