Thread: Pornography: Who here has been a victim of it.

Originally posted by Neil
Hang on, I think you are confused. Child pornography is not normal pornography. Any children involved are obviously being abused. Adults who choose to get their breasts out in a magazine for lots of money are not being abused.

I get aggrivated when people confuse issues like this.

Are you saying maturity is derived from some moralistic ideal? Maturity comes from experience. Experience comes from curiosity. It's not like the second someone turns 18 they suddenly spring into a mature, rational-thinking person...There are 8yo's who are more mature than those in their 20's!
Come on now, Brooke Burns used to be a CP star! Ever heard of Pretty Baby? Was she abused?

Oh yeah - porn kicks ass No one will ever get rid of it as long as there's a voice like this one. And who the hell equates it with rape? We could ban everything to stop any kind of bad influence and then we'd all look pretty stupid.

This is how porn changed the world:

People lost the respect for women. When a man sees a great looking women down the street. Does a man imagen her with him together loving each other OR does he see in is mind himself imitating a sexaul position with her that he saw on a porn movie? Do good looking women with intellegents even get noticed by their mind or by their body.

People when they are watching porn, they reach a point of tollerance. Once this point is reached, what else will excite them? The actual performance? Which may lead to rape or even worse, a close relashion to ones self.

And these days, there have been very early age pregnancies. What would make two very young kids have sex? How would they now how to do it? Did watching porn at an early age educate them? (And dont tell me that its a human instinct to know how to have sex and crap)

How about you, do you care even if your own sister or even daughter is raped or gets sexualy active and maybe pregnent early. Would you say: "Oh its just nature taking its way" BULL!!! We are a civilized species. Dont tell me that its normal to violate someones body or even virginity just for the pleasure of it.

And why do you compare other products and items with sex? Who are you trying to confuse? All you care about is making your point heard, but will you listen to what the opposite has to say? Or will you try to twist his words into your own views?

And be honest, How many of you, even right now have another window open on a porn site as you read these very words?

Nuff Said.

Dont tell me that its normal to violate someones body or even virginity just for the pleasure of it. [/b]

That has nothing to do with the original subject.You have no proof that porn makes a person go out and rape someone... I'm not gonna make a huge drawn out post over this, Im just gonna state a fact, we got out opinion, and you have yours, nothing you say is gonna change my view on it, and I think it would be better to just drop it.NOTHING is gonna come out of this debate besides....debate .And, just for the hell of it, I opened a porn window!What now, did I just hurt someone?I don't think so..its a harmless practice, get the hell over it..

*prepares to get brutally attacked.*

Aha! thats one tally on yes.

And I know its a debate. I have my views and you have yours, we chose to live the way we want. Listen or not, I tried to sound the warning trumpet.

Pornography is simply another form of consumer junk food in our Hedonistic culture.

Sex is now pre-packed, plastic, and tastier than ever!

Why would I want to look a piece of paper and pass out on my toilet if I could be out there actually with a woman. And no one better say "Women look at it too, dur-dur." It's almost an entirely male creation.

We are a male domination society, we've been since the dawn of our species. Think of the comparisons between the two.

1.Man - Woman
2.Male - Female

Both contain the element "man", but in the first example it just plainly seems to be a blow to the femme itself, "Woe-man". Never got that until recently.

Now, No. 2, both still contain the element "male", but -fe appears to be a subtraction of male as if the X was a lesser version of Y. In fact we know from genetics this is simply not the case.

Back to the point, only complete idiots look at porn and I would like to give them a swift kick in the balls. Sure, you could say it's the natural human sex drive, BUT MASTURBATION DOES NOT = SEX. Read from top all the way down, repeat as necessary.

BTW, I voted for it until I realized that I was thinking like a complete f(cking idiot and kicked myself in the balls.

I just hope this thread doesn't create a division in the forum between the morals and imorals. I mean the poll is 50 - 50.

Anyways, I had enough, I'm off to bed. tomorrow is another day. Work is always waiting.

Anyways, yall have a friendly goodnight.

I don't take it from a moral standpoint, I take it from a logical one.

Originally posted by IZ
I just hope this thread doesn't create a division in the forum between the morals and imorals. I mean the poll is 50 - 50.

Anyways, I had enough, I'm off to bed. tomorrow is another day. Work is always waiting.

Anyways, yall have a friendly goodnight.

Not now, I had forgotten to vote.

later

You guys make some interesting arguements. Not convincing, but interesting.

Originally posted by evangel
If you read the entire interview with Bundy, he testifies explicitly that his perversion began \"innocently\" by reading and viewing soft core porn, which eventually progressed to more twisted porn... leading to addiction and then perverted and criminal behavior. Pretty convincing testimony if you ask me.

Well, that is one way to look at it. However, once again we are talking about the principle of excess. Anything used in excess is potentially harmful.

A cause-and-effect relationship is drawn between men viewing pornography and men attacking women, especially in the form of rape. But studies and experts disagree as to whether any relationship exists between pornography and violence, between images and behavior. Even a report called the pro-censorship Meese Commission Report admitted that the data connecting pornography to violence was unreliable.

Other studies like the one done by feminist Thelma McCormick in 1983 for the Metropolitan Toronto Task Force on Violence Against Women, find no pattern to connect porn and sex crimes.

You know what happend then? The Task Force suppressed the study and reassigned the project to a supporter of censorship, who returned the "correct" results. Their study was published the one published.

"These findings are all well and good in theory, but what about real life?" you say? In Japan, where pornography depicting graphic and brutal violence is widely available, rape is much lower per capita than in the United States, where violence in porn is severely restricted. Explain that.

Pornography is free speech applied to the sexual realm. Freedom of speech is the ally of those who seek change: it is the enemy of those who seek to maintain control. Pornography, along with all other forms of sexual heresy, such as homosexuality, should have the same legal protection as political heresy. Viewing pornography may well have a calming effect on men who have violent urges toward women. If this is true, restricting pornography removes a protective barrier between women and abuse.

Pornography gives a panoramic view of the world's sexual possibilities. This is true even of basic sexual information such as masturbation. It is not uncommon for women to reach adulthood without knowing how to give themselves pleasure. It allows women to "safely" experience sexual alternatives and satisfy a healthy sexual curiosity. The world is a dangerous place. By contrast, pornography can be a source of solitary enlightenment. It also offers the emotional information that comes only from experiencing something either directly or vicariously. It provides us with a sense how it would "feel" to do something. Pornography allows people to enjoy scenes and situations that would be anathema to them in real life. Take, for example, one of the most common fantasies reported by women - the fantasy of "being taken." The first thing to understand is that a rape fantasy does not represent a desire for the real thing. Why would a healthy woman daydream about being raped? Perhaps by losing control, she also sheds all sense of responsibility for and guilt over sex. Perhaps it is the exact opposite of the polite, gentle sex she has now. Perhaps it is flattering to imagine a particular man being so overwhelmed by her that he must have her. Perhaps she is curious. Perhaps she has some masochistic feelings that are vented through the fantasy. Is it better to bottle them up?

Pornography breaks cultural and political stereotypes, so that each woman can interpret sex for herself. Some people such as Anti-feminists and puritans tell people to be ashamed of their appetites and urges. Pornography tells them to accept and enjoy them. Pornography can be good therapy. Pornography provides a sexual outlet for those who - for whatever reason - have no sexual partner. Perhaps they are away from home, recently widowed, isolated because of infirmity. Perhaps they simply choose to be alone. Couples also use pornography to enhance their relationship. Sometimes they do so on their own, watching videos and exploring their reactions together. Sometimes, the couples go to a sex therapist who advises them to use pornography as a way of opening up communication on sex. By sharing pornography, the couples are able to experience variety in their sex lives without having to commit adultery.

I believe that there is a copius amount of bias in some of your arguements. Some of you are letting your religious or social backgrounds prevent you from seeing both sides of the arguement - and without seeing both sides, you argue your point blindly and closed-minded, without listening to the other side making this debate essentially useless. This debate is old whine in new battles. The issue at stake in the morality of pornography debate is nothing less than the age-old conflict between individual freedom and social control.

And these days, there have been very early age pregnancies. What would make two very young kids have sex? How would they now how to do it? Did watching porn at an early age educate them? (And dont tell me that its a human instinct to know how to have sex and crap) [/b]

Thats just bullcrap. Girls used to get married and get kids at the age of 13. Woman have emancipated, you know? I'd say woman who work in porn are more emancipated then most women.
By the way, since we live in the age of mass-media now, and a more efficient police (usually), we know of ALOT more violent crimes. But, such crime has decreased over the years, just because it is reported and discussed more, people think it happens more. It is a bigger risk to let your kid play in a playground by itself in the 70's, then it is now. People are just more paranoid now.

The issue at stake in the morality of pornography debate is nothing less than the age-old conflict between individual freedom and social control.[/b]

Originally posted by Awaken
Are you saying maturity is derived from some moralistic ideal? Maturity comes from experience. Experience comes from curiosity. It's not like the second someone turns 18 they suddenly spring into a mature, rational-thinking person...There are 8yo's who are more mature than those in their 20's!

*sigh* generally an 18 year old is able to make more rational decisions about whether they should or should not be in a porno than a 4 year old. Until they reach that age we make the choice for them that they should NOT be in a porno.

CT, I fully agree with you.

Originally posted by IZ+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IZ)</div>

This is how porn changed the world:

People lost the respect for women. When a man sees a great looking women down the street. Does a man imagen her with him together loving each other OR does he see in is mind himself imitating a sexaul position with her that he saw on a porn movie? Do good looking women with intellegents even get noticed by their mind or by their body.
[/b]

The former.

Originally posted by IZ@

And these days, there have been very early age pregnancies. What would make two very young kids have sex? How would they now how to do it? Did watching porn at an early age educate them? (And dont tell me that its a human instinct to know how to have sex and crap)

Responsible decisions come from practical information. Kids aren't incapable of learning responsible decisions, people just don't give them enough info about sex - it's too 'touchy'. I read a report how teen pregnancies dropped somewhere after the kids learned about oral sex...

<!--QuoteBegin-IZ

And be honest, How many of you, even right now have another window open on a porn site as you read these very words?

Nope. Can't get a boner and type about getting a boner at the same time.

Originally posted by Neil

*sigh* generally an 18 year old is able to make more rational decisions about whether they should or should not be in a porno than a 4 year old. Until they reach that age we make the choice for them that they should NOT be in a porno.

CT, I fully agree with you.

If a kid wants to prance around (and yes, some do) in front of a camera nekkie, who should tell them they can't? Luring is bad, but kids say (and do) the darndest things. They're smarter these days... I'm definitely not talking about any sexual contact or adults in the picture...In fact what I'm talking about really doesn't even qualify as porn

Morals have their place these days, but they gotta change, people are miserable because of em.

Originally posted by Awaken+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Awaken)</div>

<!--QuoteBegin-IZ

And be honest, How many of you, even right now have another window open on a porn site as you read these very words?

Nope. Can't get a boner and type about getting a boner at the same time.[/b]

Me and a good friend were talking about this yesterday...

In life i like to keep a balance, i use a saying:

EVERYTHING IN MODERATION.

That means everything from reading the bible, down to watching pornography...i'm not saying that i have never seen it, BUT i don't want to watch it too much, and get hooked onto it. Once every now and then to get the blood pumping is ok...but if your addicted to it (and if you are you will probably deny it!)...it is not 'healthy behaviour'.

In life there needs to be boundary lines...every person should set their own boudary lines to an extent, but it is obvious if a person is crossing boundary lines that should not be crossed. Everything in moderation, that means porno too...

I am trying to live life like this...and it is a good approach, i presume.

Cheers!

Originally posted by Lowercase Society
EVERYTHING IN MODERATION.

Well said man.

I have to admit, I voted "no", but ut probably has a bit to do with having a kid. It's odd, the hypocrisy of parents. While I've (moderately ) indulged in a few sins from time to time, I vote against porn because I imagine how it will affect my son more than myself or anyone else.

i didn't think i had anything alse to say but i have to coment on this!

Originally posted by Awaken+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Awaken)</div>

<!--QuoteBegin-Neil

Hang on, I think you are confused. Child pornography is not normal pornography. Any children involved are obviously being abused. Adults who choose to get their breasts out in a magazine for lots of money are not being abused.

I get aggrivated when people confuse issues like this.

Are you saying maturity is derived from some moralistic ideal? Maturity comes from experience. Experience comes from curiosity. It's not like the second someone turns 18 they suddenly spring into a mature, rational-thinking person...There are 8yo's who are more mature than those in their 20's!
[/b]

what you might or might not consider as porn i dont know... BUT kiddie porn (when made as such!) is abusive to the child (not neccerely phisycal!)!
no matter if he actualy has intercours or not... NO child should WANT to be watched as a sexual being (maybe some 12-17 year old's might appriciate the attention BUT you must agree that the law is there for a REASON becouse it's much easier to take advantage of kids then an 18 year old... and yeah some 18's dont really know what their doing but much less then the kids that would REALLY WANT to be looked at in a sexual way! and maybe even some of those would look back and be ashamed of what they did when they were small...)

almost always there are exceptions to laws... but the law is there for a reason (and usualy it's a good one!) i'd hate to think what would happen to this world if kids were ALWAYS treated as adults (in the law!)

anyway... please dont try and justefy kiddie porn! (and i mean porn when made as such...) becouse most kids are not so aware (and i bet you wouldn't let your kid make a porn movie even if he said it's ok with him and your sure he knows what he's doing!)

this reminds me of that person who chose to be eaten by this cannibal... you'd have to prove this person is sane befor you'd let him do it right?
BUT if suddenly lots of people started eating other people would you make a law saying that people who want to get eaten by other people (that is comit suicide for another person) should first be checked for sanety or would you simply forbid it? (personally i think that people should be free to make such decisions for them selves as long as they're proved to be capeble of making such a decision... but such things are TOO hard to prove (be it a child that wants to do porn or a man that want's to get eaten by another man) and so its simpler to just outlaw them... and i dont see how some one can justefy kidde porn (or beign eaten/eat) as a whole... MAYBE as case per case but... not as a whole

and PLEASE lets not get into the athics of suicide or moralety of kiddie porn... that's NOT the point... and i couldn't have said it batter then Lomebririon....

believe that there is a copius amount of bias in some of your arguements. Some of you are letting your religious or social backgrounds prevent you from seeing both sides of the arguement - and without seeing both sides, you argue your point blindly and closed-minded, without listening to the other side making this debate essentially useless. This debate is old whine in new battles. The issue at stake in the morality of pornography debate is nothing less than the age-old conflict between individual freedom and social control.[/b]

it's a matter of taste... and debating it is pretty useless when you dont undersand another's POV!

I think people just like blaiming stuff. I have looked at porn, has it hurt me? No, infact I believe in waiting untill your married before having sex. I play video games where peoples heads get blown off and stuff, does it make me crazy? No, I wouldn't even hurt an animal. I don't steal, I have never tried any drug. I don't smoke, I don't even drink though I am now old enough to do so legally.

Its like the person who cuts off someones arm because they saw it on tv. Is it TV's fault? No, its because the person is a total moron. Did bundy do that stuff because of porn? No he did it because he is crazy. If he never saw porn he would of killed someone another way. Maybe he gets in an arguement then goes and kill them.

The absolute worse thing porn does, is it gives you the idea that having sex might be fun. If that idea never came to mind before seeing it though, well you have other problems.

If we are talking about sex, we might as well talk about killing (as entertainment, of course)

Different people get effected by different forms of 'entertainment'. I can say that i love a good war flick or medieval flick. But i must say that too much of them gives me a sadistic pleasure in death...it needs to be kept in moderation...let's just say TRUE STORIES...history is great, if you don't know your past, you don't know who you truely are...anyway...it is sick the way that 'entertainment' has taken a turn for today. *twItCH*

>Nobody can deny the fact that what we indulge in can become part of our behaviour, or how we react in a situation. We become socially dependent on our entertainment...we depend too much on it i think.
If we watch too much porn, our behaviour gets effected by the indulgement in that form of entertainment, and the same with war movies, and even religious ones...keep everything in moderation.
(soft disclaimer: i know i am a broken record about the 'everything in moderation', but it is important)

Again, no one said there is any direct correlation or effect. The reason I brought up Bundy and HIS OWN TESTIMONY is that it supports the argument that porn, especially violent extreme porn is AT LEAST not good.

Lome, your arguments are great from a critical thinking/neutral standpoint... I never claimed not to have a bias. In fact, I hope my bias IS evident. In regards to porn, I would not even consider it "in moderation" since, to me, it is like saying as long as you pump your veins with poison in moderation, you'll be okay.

I think we all agree that censorship is NECESSARY. Otherwise you would have people posting pedophilia, etc. online etc. etc.

The double standard that those who claim to be against censorship and "for freedom of expression" maintain (I still think) is ridiculous. They often claim subjective morality in regards to stuff like porn, yet turn around and say there should be lines drawn (which is objectivism, hence the double-standard). WHO gets to draw the line? Government. Why? Because it must be drawn somewhere because some people's idea of beauty and "art" maybe someone else's idea of obscenity.

If there is no direct effect then it doesn't mean anything.

Thanks simisu, that was really well-laid out. I agree that the law is there to protect those that may be in real danger. I WANT people who abuse children in jail...But the point is that it's a really complicated issue and many decent people DO go to jail because of some stupid technicality It's that they need to fix it, much like drug laws.

And uh, believe it or not some kids do like to be looked at sexually. I didn't make the rule, nature did

Originally posted by evangel
The double standard that those who claim to be against censorship and \"for freedom of expression\" maintain (I still think) is ridiculous. They often claim subjective morality in regards to stuff like porn, yet turn around and say there should be lines drawn (which is objectivism, hence the double-standard). WHO gets to draw the line? Government. Why? Because it must be drawn somewhere because some people's idea of beauty and \"art\" maybe someone else's idea of obscenity.

But those in favour of freedom of expression agree in subjective morality, while accepting that there is more than one person in their soceity, who has a different subjective morality to their own, so concessions are made so that we can express ourselves up until the point that it harms someone else in some way. This is not morality. It is pluralism, pragmatism and democracy.