Questions From an Excited Newbie!

[ShabbyKayak]

I've never paid any attention to how mass media articles portray porn/erotica/whatever. A lot of what mainstream media 'journalism' does, and has always done (but now more than ever), is to form certain narratives in the minds of media consumers, for insidious and even nefarious reasons.

The media can certainly often be misleading and deliberately so. However, I don't believe this is the case with the articles I am referring to. Besides, we both know that all media sources are not equally reliable.

I also believe that the reason most articles about audio porn focus overwhelmingly on scripted/performed content, is because it's the only kind of audio porn that is profitable to a business, and that in turn, makes it more worthy of mainstream media's attention, like Forbes. There are various companies, podcasts and subscription services that charge monthly for sexy stories. The kind of audio porn we like, ie sex sounds of every day people having sex, is much harder to monetize, if it's possible at all. Audio porn companies that created scripted stories own the content they create, there is an economy behind it. There isn't one for real sex sounds.

The subject of monetizing the sort of content we have on this forum is way more taboo. I believe a German magazine once did a story about this website not long after it first appeared - yeppie can tell you more about this. Why is this website so controversial? Well, obviously, we are recording people having sex without their knowledge. So, inevitably, someone will start a diatribe about how we are 'violating the privacy' of these
people. But, funnily enough, these accusations originate from the clueless sort who carry smartphones 24/7, and naively assume that no way is the $tate monitoring their location and online/offline activities, because they're not terrorists or criminals.

I get why the idea of recording people having sex is controversial. Especially when it covers a broad spectrum of behaviors, veering from ethical to unethical. Depending on where you land, people will not feel the same about it. And I totally get the irony of saying that and carrying smartphones that follow our every move. Some would retort that two wrongs don't make a right, or that they are aware of their smartphones spying on them, and they therefore "consented".

Of course, it could also be argued that if you are going to invade your neighbor's aural space by having loud sex, once it's in their space they can do whatever they want with it. I wonder how neighbors would react if someone had a sign next to the door of their apartment saying:

Dear neighbors. I use a sleep recording app. If you have loud sex, it will catch it.

I could be wrong, but I believe that in most cases both parties (the eavesdropper and neighbor having sex) would agree to abide by a don't ask don't tell policy. Neither party would want to discuss, so it's best to let the elephant be in the room.

Couples doing the same, just with sound, therefore also qualifies as porn.

Not necessarily. Because audio recordings, by themselves, are not visual (like video and images), and therefore
do not fall completely fall under the definition of 'pornography'....unless they are also accompanied by a story,
which involves text, which is a visual thing.

Perhaps the closest thing we have to this on this forum, is when a member uploads a recording of a session they
had with their wife/girlfriend/whatever, and provides a description of what exactly they were doing (if it isn't obvious! ).

But if someone uploads a sound file of a couple having sex in a car, for example, then there really isn't
anything in that post that falls under the definition of 'pornography', is there? I'll explain more below.

Porn doesn't have to come in a visual medium. It can be written or aural. Even the definition of pornography on Wikipedia says as much. Furthermore, they all accomplish the same thing. They get me aroused. Written porn and aural porn, or sex sounds as you would describe it, both paint pictures in my mind, and make my imagination run wild with arousal.

I admit that providing contexts to the audio recordings does affect my level of arousal before and after I listen to them. Meaning that knowing
a husband secretly recorded his wife cheating on him turns me on even more, than if no context was provided. But regardless of the context, I am still aroused, so it's still audio porn in my books.

I sincerely doubt that most people here don't get aroused from hearing real people have sex. I sincerely doubt that they don't pleasure themselves over it. That to them, it's just like listening to a great song. It's not. It's sexually arousing.

It could also be argued that those who have never recorded their loud neighbors having sex, but have listened to recordings shared by other people, are engaging in second hand voyeurism,

Well, no, because of the absence of the element of observation. Although, I must confess, I have used
the term 'voyeuristic' in one of my posts before, but only due to a lack of an alternative, more suitable,
adjective.

or auralism if you prefer.

A word I'm more OK with, because it explicitly means 'arousal by sound'.

It's definitely voyeuristic.

I hope you understand that auralism, just like audio porn covers lots of different kinds of arousal by sound. It doesn't just cover the real sex sounds we like. It covers fictional audio recordings (ie made up stories). Furthermore, auralism also covers any type of sound arousal. If you get turned on by the squeak of a wheel, the sound of glass breaking, or a balloon deflating, it's still auralism, even though in and of themselves, those sounds are not inherently sexual. So we end up basically where we started.

Am I going to get in trouble for using the term audio porn to describe sex sounds? I don't want to offend anyone, but I'd like to keep using it, and hopefully have discussions about it with others, like I am with you, because again, this fascinates me.

Nobody can stop you using whatever term you wish. Most members probably don't care.

But allow me to give you two reasons why I have a problem with the term 'audio porn'.

1. Consider the sort of sounds I currently upload to the forum - outdoor sex sounds. All I've done is captured audio recordings of couples having inside sex inside cars by hiding a device at some location. I haven't 'created' anything at all. It's not something I can copyright, like an action movie. I've just pressed an on/off button on a recording device, that's all. Just because the couple in the audio recording are having sex, does not qualify it as being 'pornographic'.

I understand what you're getting at, but I'd counter argue that regardless of how offensively simple it is to just press a record button, pressing that button constitutes an act of creation. Just like when you take a picture or video of yourself with your loved ones, you are capturing moments in time. When what you capture is sex or the sounds of sex, that makes it pornography. A very different kind of pornography albeit, but still porn as far as I'm concerned. It doesn't matter that it was just audio. It doesn't matter if there is little to no cinematic or sound design aesthetic in your creation. You captured real sex. That's porn to me.

Furthermore, when you are providing context to your audio (who?, what?, where?, when?), and are therfore telling a story, however basic, you are creating my friend. Documenting, whether it is with a photo or video camera, an audio recorder or a pen, is an act of creation. It can be good or awfully bad, but it's still an act of creation.

2. Casually calling what I (and others) upload to the forum 'audio porn', ignores the time, effort, risks and costs involved in acquiring these sounds. You've only just become a member, but if or when you start providing sounds for the forum - and I hope you do - you'll understand what I mean.

Obtaining real life sex sounds isn't as easy as some may think. Almost anyone can sit at home, trawl the web, and extract an audio file from a porn video, and upload it on to a website. Fine, call that 'audio porn', if you wish. But that level of 'effort' will never compare, or come anywhere close, to the level of commitment of those forum members who provide sounds - real sounds - on a regular basis.

You say that as if creating mainstream video porn doesn't require skill or effort. Same with writing great erotica. It absolutely does. And of course I respect your efforts. You and everyone else's. Although I have not recorded any sounds myself, I have uploaded sounds I found, which did require effort, but arguably is not as risky as recording it myself.

You keep mentioning extracting audio from mainstream porn videos. Who does that? I highly doubt that most people here are into that. I certainly am not. A lot of people who do that seem to want to deceive. I respect that recording real sex sounds is not the same, and can be harder depending on the situation, because it definitely varies, but it's still porn.

There is a post here, of someone who shared a very old audio recording of their mom having sex with someone who is not their dad. Both parents of the uploader are deceased. They apparently found a video in their parents house, which was a sex tape that her and her partner in the video had made. An amateur sex tape if you will. That's porn. Amateur porn. The uploader stripped the audio and shared it here. It's not the same as just native audio, but both capture real sex, and thefore both are porn.

One of the easiest ways, if not the easiest way for a newbie or anyone to find the sex sounds that we both love, is to search for "audio porn". Make of that what what you will. That's how I keep finding these aural gems. I'm happy to use sex sounds, but I still think it's porn, and I will use all the terms I can think of that will help me find the kind of content I want.