Internet Porn

The point of the article is to show you just how perverted you and the rest of America is becoming, because this nation has slowly allowed sexual perversion to creap into all facets of society.Pedophilia is slowly becoming normalized. College professors are writing books stating it is acceptable to have sex with children because it helps them become more sexually well adjusted.And it started because people wanted to watch a "little" porn. And it don't hurt nobody.And I never said there was anything wrong with hedonism, but it does matter what your source of pleasure is. Bad sources lead to bad affects.

Oh, shit! Books are being written! Well, we're hell-bound now, for sure.Actually, I know the book your thinking of - being, as it was, published by the publishing arm of my state's university - and it doesn't say anything close to what you're saying. You might have known that, actually, had you read the book, or at least bothered to inform yourself beyond Bill O'Reilley soundbites.

Steve- you've haven't addressed the fact that the article deals more with homosexuality and birth control than pornography - so it doesn't support your porn-related assertions.Also, what was the time of first sexual encounters in biblical times? I believe the marrying age was quite young, and some modern polygamists try to marry 12-14 year old girls based on their Christian beliefs.So maybe, if the trend towards pedophilia exists, it is more of a return to biblical lifestyle than the slow creep of perversion into all aspects of our society...Does anyone have ideas/evidence regarding the age of marriage in the old and new testaments?

Which article? One of your links was simply a google search result of many different articles.In any case, I saw no objective research documenting growing levels of perversion. Perhaps you can give me an objective, measurable definition of perversion. It most certainly is NOT. An unhealthy mania regarding the sexuality of children is sweeping the globe, and the result is climbing age of consent laws (which criminalizes children) and legal encroachments on privacy and communication of adults and children alike. It IS the modern witch hunt.Anyhow, even if pedophilia was becoming more acceptable, the correct term would be re-normalized, not normalized.It was only within the last century or two that children (which is never clearly defined) having sexual experiences was considered anything other than normal behavior for a child.Even the Bible describes "good" characters getting involved with very young girls, not to mention there is a bit of textual child porn as "the greatest story ever told" graphically describes two underage girls having sex with lots of men. Oh yeah, this is also the passage in which God admits enjoying sending in men to rape and kill them (when they are older).George Washington himself was known for seeking a wife from girls around 13 years old. Whoops. You have yet to produce any credible evidence that porn causes any harm, much less that it leads to pedophilia (which I might point out was around long before the internet and digital cameras).Evidence culled from actual research on the effects of pornography is pretty conclusive that there is no causal connection to harmful behavior. Yes you did, do I really need to quote your own post to you? You have yet to present ANY evidence for this claim.I have pointed out that people reading the Bible have gone on to commit atrocities, specifically admitting that the Bible was the source for their actions. Does that make the Bible a bad source? Shall we ban it?Given your attitudes on pedophilia, perhaps we should.Can you please tell me if you will ever address the studies I have cited?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

That all sounds pretty reasonable to me.I do know that the consumers of internet porn are overwhelmingly male.

Post your links again.What if I did show you conclusive evidence that porn is damaging? What then, would you turn away from it, would you have the strength to?What about now, just as an exercise, could you stop relying on porn and find pleasure solely in reality?What are you afraid of?

Edit for doubleThis message has been edited by sidelined, 06-24-2004 12:33 AM

steve Jesus steve. You sound as tightly wound as a human could be without going postal. I am curious as to whether you are disgusted by the things you describe or are somehow jealous that people other than you could find pleasure in them. Just what is the state of your sexuality that we may have a benchmark to view our perversions by.Perhaps you would like to know peoples income and spending habits to that you may explain how wrong our lives are in that way as well.Why would the sexuality of adults other than you and your significant other{others?} be the least little bit of your business. In the same way my question to you is not,never was, and never will be anybody's business but your own. Get used to being the only one responsible for what you will or will not do with what you have or do not have. And while you are at it allow others the right to make their decisions based on their wants and likes.

Yeah, sure, whatever. AnywayHere's some fast simple links.
effects of pornography - Google SearchBy the way, porn supports organized crime.

This is probably a good place to start: 404 Not Found It's Adobe.

steve Not here in Canada. Our organized crime is supported by the federal government.Much deeper pockets.Hell.if you do a proper paper chase you would probably find libaries,universities,building developments and charities bankrolled by porn.So what?

What the f'? Are you seriously telling me you can't move back through this thread to find them yourself?Here, let me hold your hand... In post #17 of this thread I have reviews of a few studies so you don't even have to follow a link. If you want to follow a link to a more in depth paper on the subject CLICK HERE. Then you'd finally be making a credible argument and not wasting people's time with repeated assertions that have no merit. You'd also finally have a milligram of intellectual integrity.At that point I would have to deal with the evidence, by refuting the study you present with actual explanations and counterdata.I would point out that in addition to evidence supporting your position, you'd also have to deal with the evidence presented in my links which are contrary to your hypothetical. Uhhhhh, yeah? If there was definitive proof that porn had a causal connection to something bad happening, I'd have no problem ditching it. There have been many periods in my life where I used no porn at all. Heck, just this last weekend I used none at all. And I found pleasure in nothing more than making out and massaging the body of a beautiful girl. Very real, very sensual.Okay, I'll admit it... two girls.But one would have been fine by me, just the luck of the draw I guess heheheh, and without question porn was NOWHERE to be found. I'm afraid you're never going to answer my questions with real answers. I'm afraid you're going to continue spouting trash instead of dealing with a reality where porn really doesn't harm anyone.This message has been edited by holmes, 06-24-2004 06:18 AM

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Mmmmmmm I originally wanted to back up this statement, but now it has me asking: where's YOUR data?My problem is simply the "overwhelming" part. I'd have no problem agreeing that males are the majority consumers of visual porn. But "overwhelming"?As part of my current media work, I have run an adult yahoo group and an independent porn site. Both had a LOT of sole female, and couple members.This seems to reflect what I remember seeing in stats about other porn sites, and regular porn markets.Women don't apppear as often in bookstores or cinemas as men, but they do get their porn and toys. Heck I think when I left Chicago there were two female OWNED AND OPERATED porn stores.Majority, yeah. Overwhelming... I'd like some stats and definitions.

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Isn't this repeated behavior against forum guidelines? Okay please detail this argument very carefully. Me and my girlfriend will get a huge kick out of seeing you try and make your case.I'm pretty sure I'm the only one of us (me and my gf) that ever remotely knew a person in organized crime and he had NOTHING to do with porn. And as soon as I figured he was connected, I stopped talking to him.As technology has improved, it doesn't even take corporations, much less organized crime families, to start a porn business.This is not to say organized crime isn't connected to porn anywhere. I'm sure they must be involved in porn just as they are connected to every other legitimate business enterprise. But they are not running the porn biz, they are not making money from every porn transaction, and using porn does not support organized crime.I'd really love to know how hedonists swapping sex tapes with each other, or people posting pix online for free makes organized crime any money. Its all porn, Steve.You are living in Fantasyland. Isn't it about time to put away childish things? Why don't we reason as mature people? Can we Steve?

---

holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)

Steve, steve, steve...A LINK TO A GOOGLE SEARCH IS NOT A VALID REFERENCE! If you can't find any primary data to support your claims, don't ask us to do it for you! Actually, the biggest money-makers in the porn industry are the mega-media-corporations - primarily via the pay-per-view system. There is essentially no overhead, they charge more, and it's all profit. (So "wholesome" companies like Disney, or at least the larger companies that they are part of, make a substantial amount of their annual profits from porn...Organized crime? Where did you get that from? Please don't provide a link to Google search "porn+organized+crime".Your link to Dr. Judith Reisman is better, but after scanning it a bit I had trouble finding any original research, or any causal link between porn and the evil things you've been listing. The primary link seems to be that porn usage and violence have both increased over a number of decades, and that therefore the porn likely induced the violence - why didn't the violence increase lead to the porn use as an escape? or population increase leading to both? or any other socioeconomic issue?Also, Dr. Reisman's website has "SCIENTIST & RESEARCHER" in big bold font on every page of her site, but in fine print, buried half-way down her CV page, we find out that her degrees are in communications - every scientific CV I've ever seen begins with the degrees, usually followed by peer-reviewed publications. Dr. Reisman doesn't have any peer-reviewed publications listed. That fact that Dr. Laura (degree in english, I believe) is her good buddy doesn't help my view that she is intentionally misleading about her training as a "scientist".My favorite line from the Reisman paper is: Porn always produces "fear, anger, and shame" following the "provoking of sex stimuli."What uptight demographic did they use to demonstrate that sexual stimulus always produces fear? (They didn't, they used anecdotal evidence...)