Porn

[plcdude]

Take a look at this recent article and respond. http://www.reason.com/news/show/123330.html

[TechBear_Seattle]

1. "Smut"

Give me smut and nothing but
A dirty novel I can't shut
If it's uncut
And unsubt-
Tle

I've never quibbled if it was ribald
I would devour where others merely nibbled
As the judge remarked the day that he
Acquitted my Aunt Hortense
"To be smut it must be ut-
Terly without redeeming social importance"

Por-
Nographic pictures I adore
Indecent magazines galore
I like them more
If they're hard core

(Bring on the obscene movies, murals, postcards, neckties, samplers, stained-glass windows, tattoos, anything! More, more, I'm still not satisfied!)

Stories of tortures
Used by debauchers
Lurid, licentious, and vile
Make me smile
Novels that pander
To my taste for candor
Give me a pleasure sublime
Let's face it, I love slime

All books can be indecent books
Though recent books are bolder
For filth, I'm glad to say, is in
The mind of the beholder
When correctly viewed
Everything is lewd
I could tell you things about Peter Pan
And the Wizard of Oz, there's a dirty old man

I thrill
To any book like Fanny Hill
And I suppose I always will
If it is swill
And really fil-
Thy

Who needs a hobby like tennis or philately
I've got a hobby, rereading Lady Chatterley
But now they're trying to take it all
Away from us unless
We take a stand, and hand in hand
We fight for freedom of the press
In other words

Smut, I love it
Ah, the adventures of a slut
Oh, I'm a market they can't glut
I don't know what
Compares with smut

Hip hip hooray
Let's hear it for the Supreme Court
Don't let them take it away


I :loveya: Tom Lehrer

[mcscajun]

155. Damn, I've always loved that tune.

Have it in my collection, of course. :hi:

[NMDemDist2]

2. that's good news

:shrug:

[plcdude]

4. I thought

it had some merit and offered some hope that many of the so-called culprits that are damaging our culture do not as far as the data says really impact it in a negative manner. I have always contended that porn may be a means to help sexual frustration rather than increase it.

[Truth2Tell]

96. Just like the alleged "science"

that purports to "prove" the ill effects of porn, this piece relies on the same logical fallacy so common to the so-called "social sciences," i.e. that correlation equals causation. Just because two things coincide, it does not necessarily follow that one is causing the other. Nobody on either side of this debate has actually "proven" anything.

[FatDave]

118. If this article purports to prove anything

It is that the supposed sex-crazed frenzy some people predicted would be the end result of easily available pornography did not occur when pornography became easily available, and in fact the opposite of that happened. One man had a theory that internet porn affected the decrease, and this was mentioned as a theory and was called controversial by the article. The final three paragraphs (almost one-third of the article) covered possible other reasons for the decrease in violent sex crimes.

[Zywiec]

3. I was thinking about this yesterday

while people were posting that the game Call of Duty 4 was making Americans more violent.

I don't believe there is a problem with porn or video games, only people.

[plcdude]

5. I agree

it is not what is outside that corrupts us but what comes from within us. Someone awhile back said that.

[helderheid]

7. I agree - I think the problem with porn and violent games is that they

end up in the hands of kids who are not capable of understanding that it's "just a game" (for both).

ETA forgot the not!

[Hawaii Hiker]

16. Porn is not a problem, only people

"I don't believe there is a problem with porn or video games, only people."

I totally agree...I saw "Scarface" several times when it first came out in 1983 & I never turned into Tony Montana, hell, I've never even smoked a cigarette...I've watched a ton of action/horror films, & it has never affected me...All this shit about porn & Hollywood causes people to act violent is classic social conservative right-wing BS!!...

To the poster who said "Oh, and the same thing goes for hookers...some people just ain't gettin' it unless they pay for it"...

Well, sometimes the hired ones www.valentinesoflondon.com are alot more fun & prettier...Of course, this is just what I heard on the news, :popcorn:

[Atman]

23. I wasn't trying to imply that only the pulchritudenally challenged go to hookers

My point was just that these morality police people seem to have the impression that everybody has a "normal" sex life, whatever that might be. But we've all seen them, the guys with five-day beards, 300 lbs overweight, mumbling to themselves while awaiting the cross-town bus. He ain't gettin' it on Thursday date night like Mrs. Suburban morality cop does after Handsome Hubby puts the 2.1 kids down for bed in their nice 4 bedroom home.

Some people have social issues, mental health issues, or have just plane bad hygiene or personalities. But they still have hormones. Again, I'd rather have these guys paying a hooker or drooling over some porn than lurking around the mall stalking our wives and daughters.

.

[supernova]

33. Or they are handicapped

Sexuality in the handicapped community is a huge and largely unadressed issue.

If you are less than physically capable, society at large writes off your sexual feelings.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/ouch/columnists/tom/241006_index.shtml

[flamin lib]

6. Rape is not a sexual crime, it's a crime of battery. It isn't about sex,

it's about power. IMO the feminist movement empowered women and they ceased to exhibit the characteristics of prey and were less likely to be seen as powerless.

Porn may even have a positive affect in providing a fantasy outlet; if your pants are around your ankles in front of a computer you're not likely to be out beating up women.

I knew the misogynists were on the run when a guy I knew told the joke: "What do battered women all have in common? They just won't listen!" but he whispered it even though he knew everybody within earshot - and it didn't get a laugh.

[plcdude]

8. I agree

about the nature of rape.

[Atman]

9. People need a release sometimes. Some people just will never get laid.

Seriously, I'm not joking. Walk through any mall or down any big city sidewalk and check out the poeple you pass. You'll see plenty of them, men and women, that you know have no chance of getting any "regular" sex. I'd rather have them wanking it to a DVD in the privacy of their mom's basement rather than seeking that release by abducting woman and forcing themselves on them.

Oh, and the same thing goes for hookers...some people just ain't gettin' it unless they pay for it.

.

[Botany]

10. Porn ... links please?

Just saying.

[TheUniverse]

11. I dont understand why some feminists want to make men feel guilty about masturbating...

(Please note Im only refering to the minority of feminists who want to ban pornography and not all of them) I put those feminists in the same boat as the religious right. They want to make people feel ashamed about a natural act in the privacy of their own home.

[Katherine Brengle]

19. Masturbating is great --

using porn is not a requirement for masturbation unless you have a very, very limited imagination.

[plcdude]

21. can't disagree

with you about that. I think it gets a bad rap but really it can be really great and should be shared.

[Atman]

24. Masturbating without porn is like fucking with the lights off.

Men are visual creatures. It ain't all about the friction, you know!

.

[supernova]

31. Here's where we women have a advantage

I can *think* my way to climax, anytime, anywhere. And if I'm out in public, nobody knows.

;-)

[plcdude]

32. o you are

such a tease really.

[supernova]

34. I think most women can

So much of sex is in the brain.

:-)

[plcdude]

37. not so sure

about "most" so will wait for corroborating evidence

[JuniperLea]

78. Yep!

Me too. My brain is my most sensitive sexual organ... you might say it's my "B" spot:)

[supernova]

89. "B" spot!

:rofl:

I like it! :D :thumbsup:

[youthere]

205. Nobody likes a braggart.

:P

[shance]

86. Thank you Katherine. Dehumanizing women, portraying them as objects to use and discard

is despicable, deplorable and should be considered the highest crime, that it is.

[Atman]

105. Wow, did Katherine say all that?

:wtf:

I agree with you, though. Dehumanizing women, portraying them as objects to use and discard certainly is despicable and deplorable.

Now, what exactly does that have to do with "porn?"

.

[DutchLiberal]

106. Then you better as well call the thought police.

[Thothmes]

197. highest crime

are you recommending that we make it a capital crime such as murder, treason, rape?

[BoneDaddy]

102. No but it sure helps

and I consider myself very imaginative

[qdemn7]

171. You are not a man

Men are visual creatures, we LIKE to look. You have a problem with that, too bad.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

36. your argument is so blatantly false its funny. no feminist is against masturbation

some feminists are against porn but last i heard porn and masturbation aren't synonyms

[Lilith Velkor]

59. They might as well be, to men in this culture

To pretend otherwise is disingenuous.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

64. In this culture?

As if it's different in any other culture?

[Lilith Velkor]

83. I don't know.

It could very well be different in other cultures. Had I a research grant, I would gladly conduct a study.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

110. thats bullshit. masturbation is masturbation, porn is porn, sex toys are sex toys.

some may help masturbations. but the definition of masturbation is not porn. thats just lying and hyperbole.

[Lilith Velkor]

114. Didn't say it was

I was simply pointing out that men in this culture are conditioned to masturbate to porn.

The norm for women is to masturbate to printed words, and nobody ever tries to create a moral panic out of it. I wonder why.

[Atman]

128. Men aren't "conditioned" to masturbate to anything!

Most of us masturbated long before we even knew porn existed. But, it does exist, and it's very prevalent, so what the hell, you go with it. I remember back in the old days, porn mags weren't accessible without going into a seedy "book store," and the best you could do video-wise was super-eight movies. Such a pain...twenty minutes to set up to pop off a quickie. It was easier to just use your imagination. Now, hell...I could click a bookmark, leave this thread and have a hundred naked bi-sexual coeds dancing on my computer screen in about 30 seconds.

Not that I would, of course. But I could!

:hi:

.

[Lilith Velkor]

145. Bollocks, sir

The very reason it's so easy nowadays is that men talk themselves into thinking they need it.

By the way, using a word like "coeds" outs you as a sexist. Not that that matters to a lot of DUers, just letting you know your slip is showing. :hi:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

146. Men have always thought they needed it.

That's why there's always been porn.

The reason it's easy nowadays is thanks to the information superhighway.

You accusing the above of being a sexist outs you as having lost the argument.

:hi:

[Lilith Velkor]

150. Whatever

Losing an argument does not vex me nearly as much as the lack of an answer to my question about why nobody ever gins up a moral panic about erotic literature aimed at women, on the ground of it generating unrealistic expectations.

But I guess I'll just put on my big girl pants and deal.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

153. Are you saying people should get in a moral panic of adult literature?

Because I don't. I think getting in a moral panic over visual porn is bad enough.

[Lilith Velkor]

162. No

I'm simply asking why visual porn is moral panic worthy, as opposed to the trashy-slashy fanfic that I occasionally enjoy.

I'd prefer that all self-appointed masturbation police shut the fuck up and go away, but still wonder what's up with the double standard.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

208. I'm guessing because the masturbation police don't read.

They're pre-literate. Thus adult literature is a foreign concept.

[Lilith Velkor]

211. Good guess

Makes as much sense as anything else I've heard.

[qdemn7]

174. Of course not....

Because it's a WOMAN thing. We NEVER get into moral panics over what women do, only men. :sarcasm:

And when all the trashy-ass soaps on TV are banned, as well as all the "other" female porn... romance novels, romance magazines, etc, then it'll be time to ban MALE porn. Of course the former will happen only when Hell freezes over. :sarcasm:

[Lilith Velkor]

179. Is it possible

...for anybody to just answer the goddamn question?

Jeez-ass, you scamps are worse than a sewing circle....

[qdemn7]

181. Sorry

My mistake. The answer is "HELL NO!". We have enough moral zealots on both the left and right screaming about their particular moral panics without starting another.

I can't figure out which group I despise more:

Right wing fundies who want to "save my soul" or Left wing fundies who want to "do it for my own good."

My best recipe for each one is the Puerto Rico Trench and 100 fathoms of anchor chain. :evilgrin:

[Lilith Velkor]

191. That was Bornagin's question

I suspect it was framed that way for the sake of being a cuntpickle, but perhaps not.

MY question was: Why the double standard? Why is male masturbation a political issue, and female masturbation...not so much?

[qdemn7]

192. Seriously?

Because we men LIKE to masturbate to pictures of naked women. That simply enrages some females (both left and right) to no end. IMO, it goes back to the idea that men are considered beasts who MUST be tamed for the betterment of society. Sort of like the Carrie Nation-type Prohibitionists were wanting Prohibition for the "betterment" of society.

As a man I also believe no matter how they claim otherwise, some feminists, despite their claims of equality, still want to make all the rules when it comes to male sexuality and other male behavior. And the last part is something that I simply will not tolerate at all.

As Lois McMasters Bujold wrote in her novel "Falling Free":

"It seemed like a woman's idea of a perfect society. Everyone was so well-behaved."

[Atman]

168. Thank you. I didn't know what to say without being incredibly rude

"Sexist" because I used the word co-ed...coming from someone with the name Lilith.

:rofl:

I love DU! Always good for a laugh!

.

[Lilith Velkor]

177. Did I ever say that masturbating to porn is a bad thing?

I didn't. Because it's not.

All I did was point out that it's a social norm.

You were the one who chose to be a douchebag about it.

[Atman]

180. I responded to your notion of being "conditioned" to need porn

I pointed out the we (males and females) begin masturbating long before we have any idea that something called pornography even exists. We don't masturbate BECAUSE of porn, we're not conditioned to do anything but masturbate, and we do that because of the pleasurable feelings we derive from it...for some, followed by horrible guilt! Porn, when readily available, is a side dish for some, a main course for others, for still others it's totally unneeded. I reject the broad-brush notion of being "conditioned" to do anything but wank it, in which case whomever or whatever put this thing between my legs and made it feel good did the "conditioning."

Further, "all you did" was not point out it was a social norm. You chose to call me a sexist, which is ridiculous and offensive. I'll have you know, I've actually been at the hot end of a flamethrower on this board for merely using the word "douche bag." The Usual Suspects cry "SEXIST!" just for saying douche bag!

We can't even agree on the nature of simple words like "douche bag," yet you've think you've got the porn thing and men all figured out. Good for you. I disagree.

.

[Lilith Velkor]

190. Why on earth would you take offense at that?

Men are conditioned to respond to visual porn, just as women are conditioned to respond to romance novels. Everybody is free to accept or reject social conditioning in regard to gender. Including you, so there's no reason to get all huffy about it.

To me, "co-ed" is a sexist term because a college student is a college student, "co-education" and the "MRS degree" went out with the hula hoop for fuck's sake. "Douchebag" is NOT sexist, because it denotes a thing and not a person.

I sometimes get called a sexist for not buying into all the assumptions of whitebread, upperclass feminism. So what? But fwiw, I apologize for calling you one, when perhaps "old fart" would have been more appropriate. :)

By the way, I have nothing figured out, especially not why there's a double standard when it comes to erotic entertainment. I find this somewhat vexatious.

[eridani]

195. Yep. Slash fiction is as dominated by women as visual porn is by men

Of course significant minorities of men get into the verbal fiction, just as similar numbers of women get into visuals.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

198. printed words dont hurt other people. a lot of us believe women in porn do suffer severe negative

consequences.

you're comparing apples to bacon.

[Atman]

200. A lot of people believe in unicorns and WMD, too

Just sayin. "Believing" something without proof doesn't turn your belief into a fact.

Now, if you had said "some women in porn," I'd agree with you.

.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

201. i meant some women in porn. plus your unicorn comment is just a bad argument

there are several studies out there about the deleterious effect on women in porn. yes, some women do fine. and if we had a good social welfare system where women in porn had free choice to be in porn or not, this would not be a problem.

the stretch about unicorns is just a dishonest argument.

[Atman]

202. It's not a dishonest argument at all.

It got you to address your false claim. SOME women do just fine in porn. SOME women actually enjoy having sex, some even enjoy having sex with multiple partners in front of a camera. Lots of activities do women harm in some way. But in a nation of 300,000,000, SOME people believe we should be able to make our own choices. If you are FORCED into performing sex in front of a camera, that is an entirely different issue.

.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

203. unicorn NEVER exist. nt

[Atman]

204. It doesn't matter in the slightest.

Did WMD? God? Pick anything you want that people say they believe but cannot prove. Come on...look at what you've switched the argument to now, when you know EXACTLY what I'm talking about. You're a better debater than that.

.

[Lilith Velkor]

210. a good social welfare system

On that, I completely agree. :thumbsup:

[Lilith Velkor]

209. Negative consequences

Is that from the porn itself, or the ghettoization of the industry?

I don't see many people get upset about men recieving anal probing on camera, aside from the usual homophobia. Among non-homophobes, there doesn't seem to be the same level of vitriol (he's ruining my relationship!1) or "concern" (he must be an abuse victim/drug addict who needs to be saved from himself, his own opinion on the matter be damned!).

That difference is due to sexism. How can it not be?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

213. my issue has nothing do to really with porn itself. you presented a ridiculous argument

deliberately confusing porn and masturbation.

i think porn is fine so long as the porn industry is made to shape up and women/men in porn have other alternatives. i also think people in porn should be older. if you can drink till 21 maybe you should not be able to fuck on screen for money. i feel the way the porn industry is run its as easy trap for young people who have alternatives to turn to.

as long as sex work can be made by free choice, i am fine with sex work (porn, prostitution and to a lesser degree stripping). However without these social welfare systems, porn is inherently harmful because most people entering it cannot have made a real choice.

[Lilith Velkor]

214. I did no such thing.

I only said they might as well be synonymous from the perspective of mainstream straight male culture. If you still think that is a ridiculous statement, OK then, we disagree.

We also seem to disagree on the age of majority issue. I think there should be only one age at which one is recognized as a legal adult, across the board: voting, drinking, draft eligibility, driver's license...all of it.

However, I most emphatically agree on social welfare and real choice. It's a relief to see I'm not alone in this.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

215. 18 year old runaways and drug addicts are too young to be in porn.

i think they are too young to be drafted too.

[Lilith Velkor]

216. 18 year olds can't be runaways

They are legal adults.

Do you think they are too young to vote?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

217. i dont know about voting because voting and not voting doesnt cause them any personal harm

whereas war/drugs/alcohol and porn do. in different degrees.

[JuniperLea]

85. I don't think it's about masturbation

I think it's more about the expectations it creates in men. I know men who have a real problem/disconnect between love and sex to the point where they cannot have sex with the women they love because those women don't look like porn stars. But if they are with a real hottie, they can't seem to connect mentally and fall in love because the hottie is a sexual object to them. It's a real problem.

[L0oniX]

161. yea ...what's so bad about www.youporn.com anyway

[originalpckelly]

12. Answer - What is a clever abbreviation for popcorn?

[FatDave]

124. I'm sorry, that is incorrect. How much did you wager?

[SidDithers]

13. What is this "porn" of which you speak?..nt

Sid

[murdoch]

54. Yes, porn is too broad a term

When I was young, I went to France and turned on the television (which didn't have cable) in the hotel room. A movie with a woman walking around topless appeared on the screen. It was some kind of art movie. Here that might be considered pornography, while over there it probably was on the same level as a movie with a man not wearing a shirt.

Pornography can cover a wide range. Material put out by Playboy probably does not contribute to anything abnormal. Far out there stuff probably does.

I remember reading Portnoy's Complaint and he talks about having sex in it. Is that pornographic? Does that lead to violence? Should we lock up the New York Review of Books crowd? On the other hand there are works out there dealing with sado-masochism. Does this lead to violence? I don't know. I don't think having women wear burqas prevents this either, it probably leads to violence on some other end. I think a moderate path between the burqa ideal and the free-speech sado-masochism ideal is needed - where normal stuff by Playboy is seen as normal, with the religious fanatics on one hand, and free speech fanatics on the other hand held at bay.

[Canuckistanian]

175. I have heard the elders speak of this

But such things are unknown to me and my people.

[CT_Progressive]

14. This thread is useless without pics.

:9

[aikoaiko]

15. self-edit - someone beat me to it.

:(

[Joe Fields]

17. Works for me...

[Katherine Brengle]

18. It doesn't have to directly cause violence to be a corrupt industry

that exploits vulnerable women, and it doesn't have to directly cause violence in order to be unhealthy.

And while watching pornography may not make one violent, there is more than enough violence within the industry and the sex industry as a whole to make up for that.

How much is enough for people?

[Touchdown]

48. I boycott porn studios that exploit women.

I only watch gay porn. ...but I guess that's bad too since they discriminate and don't hire women.:P

[Toasterlad]

154. Yippee! So Great to Be Gay!

I can have all the porn I want and still be a good person, because my porn only objectifies men!

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[supernova]

20. I generally agree with the article

in that I think porn is best viewed as a barometer/mirror of current society, rather than a cause of certain ills. Sex is a need. It may not be as immediate a need as shelter, food, and clothing, but sex is the next thing we think of after those things have been tended to, in Maslows hierarchy of needs. You could argue, and some do, that sex is present in the first three tiers.

So you aren't going to dismiss sex in your life the same way you get bored with gluing together model ships. You just can't. And anyone who can, I argue is probably cut off from themselves. Personally, I don't know that I'd want to be with a man who wasn't interested in looking at naked people.

Atman mentions, there are those who will never have sex. What are they supposed to do; lie back and think of England? I do think porn and all types of erotica provide a needed outlet. So, getting rid of it altogether is not a option.

If a person has deviant proclivities, I'd rather have that person occupying himself at home than out and about looking for prey. I think the future of virtual sex could be a real help in this regard. Rape, torture, and kill your virtual girlfriend as many times as you like. No harm done. It's hideous in the extreme, but you aren't killing real women.

As for the more unsavory aspects of the porn industry, of course it concerns me. I would much rather we have a more open and transparent porn industry that wasn't tied to organized crime and human trafficking. But would that still be porn? I don't know. Perhaps we could call it something new and healthier.

As for the article, I disagree with the author here:

Changing social attitudes doubtless have also played a role. Both young men and young women are more aware today of the boundaries between consensual and coercive sex. Kim Gandy, president of the National Organization for Women, thinks the credit for progress against rape should go to federal funding under the Violence Against Women Act and to education efforts stressing that "no means no."

While I'm definitely glad about the Violence Against Women Act, I'm not so sure that we are all that enlightened about boundaries yet. There are still far too many assaults that sadly boil down to he said/she said arguments which solve nothing.

[plcdude]

25. well said

but that is typical of your responses.

[supernova]

29. Thank you

I try to think about what I'm saying most of the time.

[plcdude]

35. it is not just

because I agree with you almost all the time you really do have a good mind.

[supernova]

44. ...

:blush: :blush:

[BoneDaddy]

104. Wow a mature response

bravo.

[supernova]

111. Thank you Bone Daddy

[porphyrian]

22. Ooo, you gonna piss off some Dworkinites... -n/t

[cuke]

26. Reason is a right wing propoganda outlet

They also think that tobacco is not addictive because some people have quit smoking. And some DUers like their swill

[plcdude]

27. yes

it is not a progressive site except in some unusual ways. See it's promotion of medical marijuana and comments concerning torture.

[BoneDaddy]

169. I take offense

I prefer my marijuana when being tortured

[supernova]

28. Broken clocks

are also right twice a day.

[cuke]

38. And how smart is it to look at a broken clock for the right time?

And if you don't look at a working clock, how do you know the broken one is right?

If anything this rag writes is true, then it could be found in a non-right-wing propoganda periodical

[supernova]

43. Because I don't need a clock to tell time

I'm old school. I know generally what time it is without looking at a clock. That is, I don't need outside confirmation of what time it is, other than my own good judgement and awareness of my surroundings.

And sometimes, as the path to wisdom teaches, something of value can come from an unexpected source.

[cuke]

46. So why look at a broken clock?

[supernova]

56. Why look at the sun?

Why look at a cat? Or a tree?

[cuke]

66. You shouldn't look at the sun. You can damage your vision

And there are good reasons to look at cats and trees. I havent seen one good reason to look at Reason

BTW, did you read the last paragraph? Did you think it was anything but major bullshit?

"But if expanding the availability of hard-core fare doesn't prevent rapes, we can be confident from the experience of recent years that it certainly doesn't cause such crimes. Whether you think porn is a constitutionally protected form of expression or a vile blight that should be eradicated, this discovery should come as very good news."

Are you confident that porn doesn't cause crimes? Why? There's absolutely nothing to support such confidence.

[supernova]

87. Confidence

I didn't argue that point because of course, I don't believe it. My position on this topic is all over this thread.

What I do believe is that, among individuals, we don't know where that boundary is between merely looking at something as an outlet then wanting to create that something in real life. There simply hasn't been enough research to definitetively answer that question. From what I observe in my own life, most people seem to be able to watch/listen to some fairly extreme stuff (music, art, and some extreme types of porn) and use it simply as an outlet, never dreaming to replicate what they watch or hear in their own lives. In truth, they are glad glad that they only watch. They manage to have families, jobs, and pay their taxes without any ill effect.

But that brings another question. What kinds of porn do you approve of?

[cuke]

91. Then why post that article?

It has nothing to do with what you said. I doubt that anyone (aside from the frothing at the mouth anti-porn types) would disagree that millions watch porn without re-enacting the scenes they've viewed and the article doesn't add anything of significance to that point. It's self-evident and doesnt need the faux-scientific approach the author assumes.

And as someone with a wide variety of interests I don't disapprove of anything sexual two consenting adults engage in.

[supernova]

92. Probably because it's a way

to talk about sex that would pass muster for GD qualifications. ;-)

This the OP's favorite topic. :P

[cuke]

100. heh

well, ya got me there

[Basileus Basileon]

30. Nah, they're more libertarian-centrist.

Which leads them to be often wrong, but also often right.

http://www.reason.com/news/show/123352.html
http://www.reason.com/news/show/122467.html
http://www.reason.com/news/show/122632.html
http://www.reason.com/news/show/122262.html

[cuke]

40. Nope

right wing all the way.

[plcdude]

45. It might be

useful to find common ground once in awhile rather than stereotyping and dismissing.

[cuke]

47. You are free to find common ground with the right wing

Forgive me if I don't join in singing Kumbaya

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

51. What specific issue in the article do you disagree with?

Or do you only have ad hominems?

[cuke]

53. It's unscientific, in case you didn't notice

but correlation doesn't demonstrate causation.

So do you have one good reason to believe that piece of tripe other than you like what it said?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

57. Well duh.

It's not like it's claiming to be a scientific article.

"So do you have one good reason to believe that piece of tripe other than you like what it said?"

There being no correlation between porn and sexual violence.

:shrug:

[cuke]

60. So do you have one good reason to believe that piece of tripe?

So far, no one has ever shown that porn has an effect on sexual violence. Want to try again?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

61. "So far, no one has ever shown that porn has an effect on sexual violence."

Exactly my point.

[cuke]

67. And that makes the article worthy .....how?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

68. Because it's demonstrating there's no correlation between porn and violence.

Or do you disagree with that too?

[cuke]

72. So why does the authot express "confidence" about his conclusion

when science doesn't support it. To wit:

"But if expanding the availability of hard-core fare doesn't prevent rapes, we can be confident from the experience of recent years that it certainly doesn't cause such crimes. Whether you think porn is a constitutionally protected form of expression or a vile blight that should be eradicated, this discovery should come as very good news."

Are you confident that porn "certainly doesn't cause such crimes"? Even though the conclusion is not supported by science?

Do you really believe that this conclusion is justified by the fact that there's no correlation between porn and sexual violence?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

74. Well, yes.

The idea that porn causes violence is a ridiculous claim that requires extraordinary evidence. The burden of proof lies with the various prudes who make such a claim.

[cuke]

77. The claim that porn does not cause violence is just as extraordinary

and requires similar proof.

Basically, what you're saying is that you can believe it in the absence of any proof. Not very scientific

[Touchdown]

97. Rhetorical faux-pas. Can't prove a negative.

...nor should he/she have to. The onus of proof is on those making the claim in the positive. I.E. that porn does cause violence. It's a rhetorical cheap shot to expect others to prove it doesn't. It's a tactic the right wing uses all the time...something you should keep in mind when you point out the host site of the article, little Mr. Kettle.

[cuke]

101. Not true

It is possible to show that some things do not affect another. And saying that "porn does not cause sexual violence" is a disprovable assertion. And the "rhetorical cheapshot" happened when the author came to conclusions that science does not support.

It's one thing to say that "there's no evidence to support the claim that porn causes violence" and another to say "Porn does not cause violence". It's a cheap rhetorical trick to claim there's no difference between the two

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

108. Baloney.

Claiming porn causes violence is like claiming ballet causes tax fraud or marionette theater causes arson.

Not all claims hold equal weight.

[cuke]

126. And claiming it doesn't is like claiming HIV doesn't cause AIDS

neither are supported by scientific proof

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

134. HIV causing AIDS isn't supported by scientific proof?

Oh my God, we've got a live one here.

:rofl:

[cuke]

136. reading comprehension is your friend

I said the opposite

try again

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

138. Oh, I read it, did you think about it?

Because your whole argument is predicated on the idea that HIV doesn't cause AIDS.

[mitchum]

130. But Morris dancing does cause assault

perhaps deservedly so

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

147. That is not an extraordinary claim.

[supernova]

151. But contra dancing rocks!

;-)

I.e., it can get you laid. No porn required.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

152. Contra dancing is porn in Afghanistan, Saudia Arabia...

and Alabama.

[supernova]

156. So, you're with the enemy now!

*stamps foot*

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

157. Don't stamp your dirty, dirty foot in my direction, harlot.

You and your erotic foot stamping.

Yuck.

[supernova]

158. Stop it! Or I'll show you the soles of my feet!

:P

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

160. Oh my stars and garters!

[Lilith Velkor]

163. It's treason in Nicaragua.

:hide:

[Touchdown]

58. Pro-porn is not right wing

It is a propaganda outlet, but their arguments on the issue of freedom of expression where it concerns adult fare (this particular article) is firmly in line with civil liberties, progressivism, and liberalism. Conservatism is for banning it.

[cuke]

63. Reason is a right wing propoganda outlet

Why rely on a source that is known to have lied when, if true, the same information can be found in a non-propogandistic source?

And since the article would be a piece of tripe regardless of where it was published, why defend the article? And since the article is NOT about freedom of expression, I have no idea why you brought that up

[Touchdown]

76. Ok, so I got you wrong. I thought you were anti-porn.

You were just thread-jacking. Sorry. My bad.:hi:

[cuke]

79. Not thread jacking

Pointing out how flawed the OP is has nothin to do with thread jacking

[Touchdown]

81. You pointed out the source, not the subject matter.

Not buying it. It's still thread jacking.

[cuke]

84. Nope

Pointing out that a source has a history of lying is 100% appropriate.

[Touchdown]

93. Yep.

Thread-jacking

[La Lioness Priyanka]

39. i think there should be better controls in the porn industry and better social welfare

so when women are in porn they are actually making a free decision.

[plcdude]

41. I think

you're right.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

I wish they'd stop conflating feminists with anti-pornography.

Just another attempt to slur feminism.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

49. in some ways i am anti porn. atleast anti current porn practises.

i think women in porn should be older (if you cant drink before 21, i dont think you should be able to be in porn either)

i think this country needs social welfare so women in porn are making a free decision

also drug rehab programs should be more readily available.

that said, there is a lot of queer produced queer porn i enjoy.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

123. I wish people would stop equating criticism of porn with a desire to censor or ban

There are very few feminists who call for an outright ban on porn. Those of us who speak out against it are trying to point out how the mainstream pornography that is being widely consumed perpetuates a disturbing view of sex and relationships. It doesn't matter how much you try to insist that you're not for banning anything, you're still going get outraged accusations of trying to take away someone's free speech. Please. I figure things like porn and Fox News are the price we pay for having free speech.

I also hate the way porn is equated with sex. They are not the same things.

[Cerridwen]

42. He quotes a "study" by an economist?!

Aren't they the same ones who are surprised our economy is in the shitter? Aren't they the same ones trying to tell us the economy is fine? While I might believe an economist knows about porn, I kinda wonder what he knows about rape and crime. You think he thinks the economy is doing swell?

Using the "logic" in the article, "porn up, crime down" I could claim porn up, oil prices up; porn up, housing bubble burst; porn up, Iraq burning; porn up, Pakistan under "emergency" ruling. Geez, this is fun. What else has the increase in porn brought us? Let's see, more porn, SCOTUS appoints pResident; more porn, r/w screeching head gets multimillion dollar contract; more porn, thousands of jobs outsourced; more porn, wages stagnating; more porn, Saudi prince meets pope. I mean, adjusting for all other variables.

Hey, it may not have prevented anything but it sure didn't cause it.

OW, my head hurts.


edit to add: did he use the same research methods for this conclusion as he did for proving the myth of racial profiling? He wasn't very clear.

[cuke]

50. Porn is why we invaded Iraq!!!!

and the "politically aware" DUer's agree with this moran

[Cerridwen]

71. Apparently.

I'm as guilty as others of wanting to find proof of my beliefs; and I get called on it and have to prove it on this board.

That someone gets a pass on providing proof just because they publish nationally or have a microphone makes my teeth itch.

[plcdude]

52. The point I find

of interest and import is "But if expanding the availability of hard-core fare doesn't prevent rapes, we can be confident from the experience of recent years that it certainly doesn't cause such crimes"

[cuke]

55. You thought that was an important point?

But it's not even true, as far as anyone knows. Why believe it? Just because an article in Reason says so?

[plcdude]

65. I am NOT promoting

this website or reason.com. I am suggesting that this article is pointing out demograhically that porn is not evidently related to violence associated with rape.

[cuke]

69. And you believe that tripe?

Why in the world would you believe that porn is not related to sexual violence? There is absolutely no scientific reason to believe that.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

70. Wait...

so there's a scientific reason to believe that there is?

:rofl:

[cuke]

75. *-like black and white thinking won't help you with science

Science does not support any conclusion about the effects of porn on sexual violence. To be "confident" that porn does not cause these crimes one must rely on something other than science

So again I'll ask you, is there one good reason to believe the author's conclusion that we can be confident that porn doesn't cause sexual violence?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

113. Sure.

"So again I'll ask you, is there one good reason to believe the author's conclusion that we can be confident that porn doesn't cause sexual violence?"

Common sense. The same reason I don't believe folk music causes extortion.

Just because there hasn't been scientific proof showing that folk music does not cause extortion is doesn't mean there's a good reason that it does. Common sense, logic, and reason are all a part of science.

[cuke]

127. Ahh, common sense

Like throwing salt over your shoulder. That was once common sense

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

142. Um, no, that was a superstition.

Try again though.

[smoogatz]

109. Is there any "scientific reason" to believe that it is?

The evidence would seem to indicate no connection, or even an inverse connection, as the article says. If the availablity of porn has increased dramatically in the last ten years, say (and it has), and the incidence of rape and other acts of sexual violence have decreased dramatically over the same period (and this also appears to be the case), then what conclusion would you have us draw? Would you still maintain that, in general, there's a causal relationship between sexual violence and the use of porn? With what evidence would you support that argument?

[cuke]

129. No

and in the absence of evidence for either position, the only reasonable position is "I don't know. No one does"

"If the availablity of porn has increased dramatically in the last ten years, say (and it has), and the incidence of rape and other acts of sexual violence have decreased dramatically over the same period (and this also appears to be the case), then what conclusion would you have us draw? "

There's only one conclusion that can be reasonably drawn - "the availablity of porn has increased dramatically in the last ten years, and the incidence of rape and other acts of sexual violence have decreased dramatically over the same period"

Two facts - increased porn, decreased sexual violence

Those two facts are not enough to draw any conclusion except that porn increased and sexual violence decreased. Those two facts are not enough to reach any conclusion about how porn affect sexual violence. The fact that the author ignores this, and reaches the conclusion that porn does not have an effect demonstrates the author's bias

[smoogatz]

132. Utter nonsense.

The fact that the author drew the logical conclusion is not evidence of "bias," unless the bias you're accusing him of having is a bias toward drawing logical conclusions. The numbers are large, the timeline is lengthy, the evidence is compelling and the conclusion is obvious. I think it's also pretty clear whose viewpoint is biased here (hint: the person who's struggling to refute the obvious with neither evidence nor argument) and it's not the author's.

[cuke]

133. that was nonsense

"The numbers are large, the timeline is lengthy, the evidence is compelling "

You left out the part where the author totally ignores the possibility that these effects were caused by other factors.

[smoogatz]

135. You mean this part?

Where he talks about the possibility that other factors are involved?

"That, of course, is only a theory, and the evidence he cites is not conclusive. States that were quicker to adopt the Internet may be different in ways that also serve to prevent rape. It's not hard to think of other explanations why sexual assaults have diminished so rapidly -- such as DNA analysis, which has been an invaluable tool in catching and convicting offenders.

Changing social attitudes doubtless have also played a role. Both young men and young women are more aware today of the boundaries between consensual and coercive sex. Kim Gandy, president of the National Organization for Women, thinks the credit for progress against rape should go to federal funding under the Violence Against Women Act and to education efforts stressing that 'no means no.'"

[cuke]

137. No, read the last paragraph

where he says we can be "confident" that porn doesn't cause sexual violence.

The fact that he says something different elsewhere only proves how irrational the argument is

on edit: You may want to read the following post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2226564#2228414

[smoogatz]

139. Again, it's a reasonable conclusion, given the apparent lack of evidence

to the contrary (which you still haven't presented, because there isn't any). You may want to take a look at post #117. It's devastating, and I think it's directed pretty squarely at you.

[cuke]

141. A lack of evidence proves nothing

You might want to read about some science.

[smoogatz]

143. Right. You have no evidence to support your utterly baseless assertions,

therefore you can prove nothing. Except your own inability to reason, that is.

[cuke]

148. I made no assertion

When it comes to whether or not porn has an effect on sexual violence, my "assertion" was "I don't know. No one knows"

It's at this point I recommend that you re-read post #117

"It is irrational and proof of poor thinking patterns to claim that unless and until someone can show that a relationship between variable X and variable Y DOESN'T exist beyond a shadow of a doubt, that in fact it does."

You are doing something similar. You are saying that until someone can show that a relationship between variable X and variable Y DOES exist beyond a shadow of a doubt, that in fact it does NOT exist

[distantearlywarning]

164. Please don't cite me to support this craziness.

The confusion you are causing here arises from combining two different arguments, one of which (yours) is trying to prove a negative.

The article the OP posts states (in a nutshell):

Argument 1: I can prove that there IS a correlation between increased rates of porn usage (variable X) and decreases in violence against women (variable Y). Assuming you believe the author, this is an statement arguing that there is positively a relationship between variable X and variable Y.

Your argument is different:

Argument 2: Until you can prove that no relationship exists between increased rates of porn usage (variable X) and increases in violence against women (let's call this variable Z for clarity), you can assume one does exist. This is a statement demanding that your opponent prove a null (no) relationship between variable X and variable Z. This is a logical fallacy, and not even technically possible to do because you would have to conduct an infinite number of studies to make sure you never ever found one with the indicated results.

As for this statement: "You are doing something similar. You are saying that until someone can show that a relationship between variable X and variable Y DOES exist beyond a shadow of a doubt, that in fact it does NOT exist." - What your opponent has asked you to do here is provide positive proof of your assertion of a relationship between porn and increased violence, which is completely legitimate and not fallacious. This demand is in fact what scientists do every day, in a sense - demand positive proof of phenomena from one another. Although none of us ever really believe that we 100% "prove" anything, we don't ever assert that a relationship between variable X and variable Y exists until someone does show that it exists.

[cuke]

172. That's not what the author said and not what I said

1) The authors claims that we can be confident that porn does not cause sexual violence and bases his argument partially on the lack of evidence that it does cause sexual violence

2) When it comes to whether or not porn causes sexual violence, I did NOT say it does because the author (or anyone else) cant prove a negative. I said "I dont know. No one does" so I don't know where you got the idea that I think porn causes sexual violence

"What your opponent has asked you to do here is provide positive proof of your assertion of a relationship between porn and increased violence"

Just to be clear, I never made that assertion. The only things I've said is that

a) I don't what the relationship is
b) Showing that correlation does nothing to show whether or not porn causes sexual violence

You seem to think that I believe porn causes violence for no reason other than I don't believe the author. That is ridiculous

[smoogatz]

165. If by "similar" you mean "the exact opposite," then you've got a point there.

Yeesh. Also, apparently, in your reverso-world a complete lack of evidence for an argument is actually proof of its correctness! What amazing feats of illogic will he execute next?

You know, there's a certain amount of spectator appeal in your appetite for public humiliation. I haven't seen anything like it since Larry Craig on the Today Show.

[cuke]

173. Wrong

I have never said that porn causes violence, so I don't understand why you think I said its correct.

And several people have pointed out the flaws in the article. For one thing, he mistates the conclusions of the research he cites as a basis for his argument.

[Cerridwen]

62. I don't think he proved that point.

Any more than I've ever thought rush limbaugh has ever proven one of his points. Saying it doesn't make it true.

That was my point.

[plcdude]

73. I don't know of

any social research that "proves" anything. It is merely pointing out that maybe there is no relationship between porn and violent sexual behavior give the data we have about both of these phenomena in the past few years.

[cuke]

80. Maybe or maybe not

but this article sheds absolutely no light on the issue. That's what happens when one uses right-wing propoganda as a source.

[Cerridwen]

82. It also equates rape with sex...there are millions of women on this planet

who know otherwise. Gee, maybe all we need to do in Darfur is bring them some internet porn? Think that might stop the violence there?

That's what this author is trying to say; increased access to internet porn results in decreased instances of rape (read the economist's study he cited); i.e., rape equal act committed by sexually frustrated males. I'm actually surprised more men don't find that insulting rather than something to crow about.

[Lilith Velkor]

115. No, it equates rape with sexual frustration

Did it ever occur to you that some men are purposely kept sexually frustrated so that they may be used as weapons?

[eridani]

196. And that is only half right

Sexual frustration + the sense of entitlement that one is OWED assistance from some other live human being in dealing with the problem = rape.

Access to porn might help with the former, and the violence against women legislation with the latter.

Women certainly get frustrated sexually, but I don't know a single one who has ever assumed some kind of natural right to assistance from other persons with her problem. (Now, things might well be different if there were ever to be a serious shortage of D batteries. :) )

[Gormy Cuss]

88. No, the writer broadened the conclusions of the economist in that article.

Kendall's paper is available online. I skimmed it but was still able to find sufficient caveats by the author. Kendall's research is in the category of "interesting" or "worthy of further investigation" and is by no means conclusive evidence of how the increase in internet pornography may be related to a decrease in reported rapes. It's just an economic analysis suggesting that there seems to be some connection. It's like the Freakonomics guys observing a decrease in violent crime after abortion became legal.

http://www.law.stanford.edu/display/images/dynamic/events_media/Kendall%20cover%20+%20paper.pdf

[debbierlus]

90. There are problems with porn

Porn is catered to men, who are very visually stimulated. Thus, they feature positions that show women in all kinds of positions
that may be very erotic for a man to look at - but don't do much for the satisfaction of women in the real world. Legs bent over your head, positions that provide little, if any clitoral stimulation - the problem with this - men think this is what women want, not remembering that these women are paid actors. No foreplay either, just lots of visually stimulating eye candy. It also puts pressure on women to try to fulfill these fantasies for men (ever read all the womens magazines with titles like 'How to please him , 2001 positions to make him crazy)...

Porn takes the romance away from sex by objectifying the body to the point of a science anatomy chart.

It causes tensions, in real world relationships, many women feel they aren't enough for the man they love, when
they have to watch other women having sex to be sexually satisfied.

Look, I am not saying to ban porn. I have watched a lot of these discussions about porn, & the people who like porn refuse
to acknowledge that there can be any sort of problem with it. I have talked to a lot of women who have been very hurt by the
use of pornography by their partner. Almost all women I know have been in a relationship at one time or another that has been affected by this issue.

Porn has real world consequences. Let's just be honest about this fact.

[Touchdown]

94. The responders in this thread proves the old adage.

To those who believe, no proof is necessary.
To those that don't, no proof is adequate.

How human nature.;)

[Hydra]

99. Don't expect that to change

"I believe what I believe, so you must be wrong."

That's fine as long as they keep their eyes out of my bedroom and off my computer.

[NJmaverick]

95. Classic case of fitting the "facts" to match personal opinion

Not unlike when right wingers say the Bible supports their personal hatred of homosexuals.

[Hydra]

98. I think this song sums it up:

"The internet is really really great"
"For porn"
"I’ve got a fast connection so I don’t have to wait"
"For porn"
"Huh? There's always some new site,"
"For porn!"
"I browse all day and night"
"For porn!"
"It's like I’m surfing at the speed of light"
"For porn!"

http://www.lyricsondemand.com/soundtracks/a/avenueqlyrics/theinternetisforpornlyrics.html

Really, our society has to get over it's Puritan roots. If you want porn to go away, make sex more open, safer(HIV cure and perfect birth control) and quit acting as if it were some sort of sin or amoral act.

[CT_Progressive]

119. roflmao

:rofl:

[DutchLiberal]

103. That's been known for a long time. No *credible* research has ever established

a causal relation between porn and sex violence.

[hiphopnation]

107. meh

seems largely inconclusive, raises an eyebrow but no reason to conclude that there's a correlation, it doesn't seem to follow.

but the article states as much, it's a fair analysis.

but again, this thread is useless without links, videos, and pics. :-p

[Froward69]

112. Even with porn

American society is stunted. and to a large part ashamed of the human body. in Europe, or Aisa the sexual condition of humans is rational. here it is bad or wrong some how. "Nipples after nine" would help society get over itself.

I read an earlier response that attempted to explain why men are not interested in the women they love and cannot love the women they are interested in... BECAUSE of porn of course. yet it never occurs to anyone the women the men love, have and always will be there. nor that that woman he loves was a hottie at one time. The "Hotties" cannot be loved not because they are what he sees in the movies. but rather their age. I lust 10 times a day and yet love only one at a time.

when I made love to my wife I never thought of how she looks today. but rather how she looked in HS. I truly think it is a trade off. My wife was far more interesting (grey matter) after she had 10 years under her belt, than she was Then. Back then, I tolerated her ignorance, immaturity and lack of life experience, to get laid by a hottie.

[TimBean]

116. People who don't want other's to watch porn are as bad as anti-gay ...

anti-things that don't involve them.

If it doesn't involve you, stay the fuck out of my life!

[distantearlywarning]

117. Some thoughts about this thread. And a big rant.

1) The evidence presented here is correlational. This means that it cannot be "proven" that porn leads to a decrease in violence against women. However, it doesn't mean that the relationship is completely and totally meaningless either.

Further, no matter which side of THIS particular issue you come down on, please remember that many other social phenomena we discuss here on DU are also supported by correlational evidence (the relationship between gun control and crime rates, for instance). If you are criticizing correlational evidence here because it doesn't happen to fit your own personal beliefs, please remember to carefully weigh it when it does support your beliefs. In other words, whatever you believe about a certain type of evidence, either believe it all the time or not at all, not just when it suits your purposes to do so in various threads. Otherwise you are a hypocrite and a moron and the rest of us will grow rapidly tired of reading your hypocritical, moronic posts. I'm not calling out anybody in particular here, just making a general point.

2) "Arguing from Ignorance" - A negative cannot be proven. Thus the onus of proof for any given relationship between phenomena is on the person who claims it exists. It is irrational and proof of poor thinking patterns to claim that unless and until someone can show that a relationship between variable X and variable Y DOESN'T exist beyond a shadow of a doubt, that in fact it does. See: http://www.philosophicalsociety.com/Logical%20Fallacies.htm#ignorantiam

3)"Argument Against the Person" - Attacking the source of evidence is also a logical fallacy and evidence of poor debate skills. The truth of an argument doesn't depend on the person who made it. See: http://www.philosophicalsociety.com/Logical%20Fallacies.htm#hominem

So...What are my personal sentiments about porn? Who the f*** cares! Personally, I'm a LOT more tired of seeing the same irrational, moronic, flame-inducing thinking patterns displayed over and over here again on DU than I am tired of every topic du jour. For every daily petty war on here, there's at least 3 people right in the middle of it completely misunderstanding items 1, 2, and/or 3 above and posting their misunderstanding wildly everywhere. Logic: Learn it, Live It, Love It so you can stop giving the rest of us headaches trying to untangle the twisted wreckage of your crazy thinking patterns in every SINGLE F***ING THREAD FOR F***ING MONTHS! :crazy:

And we're supposed to be the smart ones. Sheesh. I hate to see what it looks like over at Freeperville. x(

*dons flame proof suit*

[hiphopnation]

121. wish i could recommend this post

this thread is chock full of all three of your examples, one poster has single-handedly covered all three by themselves!

sad and infuriating to witness

:thumbsup:

[Hydra]

122. No flame suit needed for my response

It continues to surprise me that a place like this, that is arguably one of the magnets for smart people with critical thinking skills has so many people willing to ignore logic in favor pure opinion...and call it "obvious truth."

[cuke]

131. I disagree with #3

On logical grounds, it's true, but practically speaking it's false. I have no problem dismissing anything a republican says (without proving it) merely because they are republican. I think the distrust has been more than earned and is reasonable

[hiphopnation]

144. intellectually lazy

and frankly, kind of juvenile

(a) why make it about party politics?
(b) On logical grounds, it's true, but practically speaking it's false Explain the difference, as you understand it, between logic and practicality? How do you justify this?


we (the progressive community) are not better than they (the conservative community, republicans?) just because we say we are. we are better because we have reason, facts, logic, compassion, intellect, strength of character, open-mindedness, tolerance, et cetera et cetera. ad homonym attacks are not the way to outwit your opponents -- in fact, it exposes you as a phony and further weakens your argument. surely you must know this.

[cuke]

149. OK

but I'll start by pointing out that you're name calling is what's juvenile here

a) Because this is a political board
b) Logic does not apply to all human behavior and logic states that an ureliable source should never be relied upon. Surely you must know *this*

[hiphopnation]

207. ...

a) Because this is a political board and here you are bringing party politics into a discussion that has absolutely nothing to do therewith -- what's more, you're using it as a means of attacking and discrediting a source. Again I say, intellectually lazy, a cop out, weak.

in logic, a premise can be false and an argument still valid, no?

but i fail to get to the thrust of my point which has been amply made in the thread -- you're asking for two things:

1. to prove a negative, i.e., just because one cannot scientifically prove that the proliferation of pornography leads to a decline in violent sexual assaults doesn't mean that it is not true

2. that the premise be dismissed, in its entirety, based on the source.

i cannot abide

[conscious evolution]

120. I don't like porn

A good 'training and educational' film is a whole nother story though!

[incapsulated]

125. "Rape is down 72 percent" ??

"Since 1993, violent crime in America has dropped by 58 percent."

No source cited for any of these rather unbelivable bullshit stats.

"Free minds and Free markets" and free statistics we make up, I guess.

[sampsonblk]

140. Clean up the industry first. (Good links here)

The porn industry in the USA is nothing but an incinerator for needy young girls.

Clean that up, and then let's see what happens. It may not be the pornography. It may be the industry itself:

Jenna Jameson’s 25 Reasons Why No One Would Ever Want To Be a Porn Star
Jenna lays it out there like no one else can.
http://antipornographyactivist.wordpress.com/jenna-jamesons-twenty-five-good-reasons-why-no-one-would-ever-want-to-become-a-porn-star/

Chloe Jones is Dead. Hope I didn't ruin anyone's evening.
http://pornstarupdates.wordpress.com/2007/09/17/where-is-chloe-jones-deceased-liver-failure/

Haley Paige is Dead.
http://pornstarupdates.wordpress.com/2007/10/12/where-is-haley-paige-dead-murdered-by-her-husband/

Top star Sasha Grey on the Tyra Banks Show - If you haven't seen this, you won't believe it.
This little girl has become a huge star in the industry. She's proud of it - for now. I pray this will end happily for her. But I fear not. She thinks she's going to be different. How likely is that?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxUq_zzvAaA

Lastly, absolutely beautiful Crissy Moran recently got out of the business. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crissy_Moran)
On paper (Ok, on MAGAZINE paper) it looked like she was a glamorous starlet. She had expensive photo shoots and mag covers and such. It wasn't all that glamorous for her in real life. It was pretty crappy, and now she's spending her time trying to get her pictures removed from the internet. I think there's a happy ending in this for Crissy.

[and-justice-for-all]

159. I like Porn...

I have absolutly no problems with it whats so ever.

If I read another line about "women being used and discared...blah blah blah" I am going to snap. Women, enjoy sex just as much as men do. PERIOD. People will and always will no matter what, fornicate for pleasure.

[Anais_98]

166. what?

Of course women enjoy sex. But pornography is not for the enjoyment of women- it isn't supposed to be. It is for men and their fantasies.
If men find it erotic for a woman to be called 'b*itch' or 'wh*ore' and to be subject to degrading acts then that is what will be included in porn (as is common these days).
Pornography also shows women as subservient and men as dominant. I was reading a study, I should try find it, that said in most porn movies pleasure is not equal. There is much more time spent of acts that pleasure men than vice versa, and often there is no reciprocity at all. If you believe women enjoy sex, then shouldn't their sexuality be as important as men's, and shouldn't they have as much agency and control as the men in the film, not less?

This is not to say that porn causes sexual violence- no one knows (although Ted Bundy would say it does). It just shows that porn dehumanises women which I believe is a problem in itself. But you may disagree

[Atman]

176. That is a ridiculous

Working at McDonald's is degrading. But some people actually like it. Point being, you've broad-brushed everyone to fit neatly into your own little world of neurosis. Sure, some people, even men, do porn because they have no other choice. Just as some people work at McDonald's because they have no other choice. But you obviously haven't viewed much porn judging by the way you describe it. Or at least, you've been viewing the wrong porn.

I've seen plenty of porn actually PRODUCED by women. There is an entire section of female-produced, women-centric porn at our local video store (or so my neighbors tell me!). Right next to the "couples" porn, the gay porn, the gay bsdm porn, the gangbang porn, the "barely legal" porn, the mature porn, the fatties porn, etc, etc. You seem to have only one small idea about what "porn" is, and therefore you assume all porn fits neatly into that category. You are not clueless...you've been brainwashed. Whether it was by your clergy, your parents, or an abusive dickwad boyfriend isn't for us to know. But YOU know. Something or someone along the way told you that all women hate anything except missionary position sex with the loving husband. Probably on a certain night of the week, after the kids are in bed, but make it quick because you have to get up early to make cookies for the bake sale.

Sheesh. Even June Cleaver liked Ward to play slap and tickle with the beaver every now and then!

.

[and-justice-for-all]

193. Hahaha!! nt

:spank:

[Sparkly]

167. No cause/effect is shown either way in this article.

As science, it's nonsense.

[distantearlywarning]

199. Correlation doesn't mean causation, it's true.

But that doesn't make correlational research "nonsense". Believing that only experimental work is valid is a mistake often made by amateur scientists or those who have a little bit of training (but not a lot). Quite a bit of social science research is correlational simply because it is so difficult to study some phenomena experimentally. And determining correlation can often be a great initial step to determining a direction of causation and potential mediating factors.

Actually, the best "proof" that something exists is when it can be shown to be causally true in the laboratory AND have a correlational relationship in the real world.

[youthere]

206. If correlation=causation...

then every person who owned a plaid couch in the 70's was a porn star.

[Atman]

170. I can't believe I forgot this bumper sticker...

I've been selling it for a couple of years now...

[progressivebydesign]

178. The explosion of internet porn and sexual sites is problematic.

Not coming down on either side of the porn issue in general. HOWEVER.. the immediate and ready access of porn, and hard core porn, and violent porn, and websites for sexual relationship hookups and exchanging porn, has definitely harmed our society. Used to be that a man might have a magazine they hid under a mattress, or under a car seat, perhaps saw an adult film a few times a year. Now.. they have instant and 24 hour access to all types of porn and people who will intereact with them. It's spawning an entirely new social paradigm and causes problems in relationships, jobs, and families.

[superduperfarleft]

182. Best reply of this thread.

Funny, you said almost exactly what I wanted to say as a response to this entire thread, and many other threads on DU regarding women's issues.

I'm kind of agnostic on the porn issue myself, leaning towards disliking it, but just because I don't have a ridiculously binary opinion of bad vs. good doesn't mean I can't understand why some people find it exploitative.

A major problem I have with these discussions is that someone always has to bring up mental illness, i.e. Dworkin has a "neurosis" or "issues." It's completely irrelevant, and considering how our culture tends to downplay the concerns of women as being "hysterical" etc., it makes the person making the accusations look like a dismissive jerk. People should argue the points being made as opposed to accusing the person that is anti-porn of being mentally ill.

To me, part of being "progressive" means that just because I don't necessarily agree or disagree with the sentiment being expressed, I can at least understand why a person would make certain claims. It's not justification, it's empathy.

[Atman]

183. And it was VHS before that, and film before that, and the printing press before that...

A guest on NPR one day, years ago, made a very credible case that most major advancements in information technology were helped into the mainstream because of PORN. The first video tapes were porn. When movable type made mass production of books possible, it wasn't the bible that made the technology take off...it was pornographic novels.

I reject your premise that porn has "harmed" society. Perhaps it has changed it, in some way bad. But porn has also helped bring new technology to the masses, like it or not, by helping making these new technologies economically feasible. Sad, maybe, but true. But I don't think its sad. It just is.

.

[superduperfarleft]

184. Your credibility is already shot, so don't bother.

Your reply above was one step above telling a woman that if she'd like porn if she just got a good deep-dicking.

[Name removed]

185. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[superduperfarleft]

187. .

Burn 'er burn 'er!!!!!

So I point out how dismissive you are towards a woman who expresses concerns about pornography, you respond by suggesting that maybe it was just because she is neurotic or had an abusive ex-boyfriend, and I'm the one acting like a freeper?

Gee, ya got me. I'm in awe of your logic.

[Name removed]

188. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[defendandprotect]

212. True --- males masturbating in their living rooms late at night evidently very common ---

wives finding stuff their husband's were watching ---

and -- even more problematic --- is the closeness of adult porn switcheroo into child porn.

[ruiner4u]

186. Ya know who else hates porn?

The Taliban...


Just sayin'....

[JVS]

194. porn and statues of buddha

[yowzayowzayowza]

189. Pushin 180 replies w/o encountering the werd...

repression.
:shrug: