Why is it so?

[debussy symbolism]

Oh so he is an adult. Then it's a different story.

[leahcim]

it's really a matter of money see, monkey do.

Careful, you'll get booted out of your Church for saying we're apes

[leucippus]

study shows that those who have been exposed to pornography show more violent tendencies towards women in later age.

I've seriously lost faith in those kinds of studies.  The conclusions are often quite illogical.

If you do a study on men who have been violent toward women and discover that they have all had exposure to pornography, it doesn't follow that all men who have been exposed to pornography will become violent toward women.  It just means that the type of men who become violent toward women are more likely to be INTERESTED in pornography.  Preventing them from being exposed to it probably won't change their underlying nature one iota.

By the same token, exposing a peaceful person to pornography probably isn't going to change them into a violent person either.

This is like the famous study that was done some time ago concerning the fact that people who have pets tend to live longer and healthier lives than those who don't.  So the recommendation is to run out and buy a pet.  What an absurd conclusion!

It's not owning a pet that made those people live longer and healthier lives.  It was simply the fact that those people are more loving in their nature.  They would have still lived longer and healthier even if they didn't own the pets.  Also, people who are callous and harsh aren't going to benefit from owning a pet.   Most likely, they'll just take their frustrations out on the pet and shorten its life!

The people who do these studies often amaze me at the absurd conclusions they jump to.

They once did a study in the city where I used to live.  What they did was, they hired extra police officers for a month and instructed them to go out and enforce the law to the letter.   After the month was up they noticed that there were more crimes committed that month than every before in the history of the city!  I might add here that they openly admitted that they were measuring the crime rate by the number of people they arrested.

So their conclusion was that hiring extra police officers and putting them on patrol does not reduce crime.

The only thing this study showed me is that the people in charge of these studies are complete idiots!

So anyway, the idea that exposing someone to pornography is going to make them become a violent person is probably total hogwash.  The study was most likely retroactive, based on a study of how many violent men had been exposed to pornography which is a TOTALLY DIFFERENT THING!   There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to believe that exposure to pornography is what made those men become violent.  It's MUCH MORE LIKELY that those violent men just happened to be drawn to pornography. 

Do you see what I'm saying?  The study has it completely in REVERSE!

I don’t trust "studies" at all because I've seen far too many erroneous conclusions drawn from them.

[debussy symbolism]

Comparing pornography studies with criminal studies is unequivocally incorrect, because of the different nature of the study.

Pornography that features violence and a total disregard for women does infact shape belief of youngsters, who in turn would be more likely to exert that type of behavior on women. Much like rap music, pornography does set in the child's mind and etches beliefs. Since the child is young and hasn't had yet much experience in such matters, he is going to acknowledge that what he sees for granted and is more prone to acting it out later.

A study has shown(yes, I am going to resort this time to studies), that teenagers who listen to music with negative lyrics are more apposite at carrying out those lyrics. Much like the rap, metal music that carries the connotation of suicide, rape, murder, etc.

Pornography consumes most space on the internet. Naturally, much of pornography falls into the hands of young children. It is a known fact that internet is the biggest time consumer of an average citizen. Consequently, pornography would be the most viewed aspect of internet, by children or otherwise. That naturally means that whatever the child sees, the child will more likely act out.

Another study has shown(Yes, I will use the studies) that pornography possesses addictive qualities and that the viewers would be categorized into several sections.

1. Curiousity. The viewer stumbles upon the material and becomes enticed by it.

2. Interest. The viewer starts to return to the material.

3. Positive dependance. The viewer must now have the material.

4. Acting out. The viewer acts out the material suggested.

This of course is very, very general and probably doesn't apply for a mojority of viewers. However, the outline is much greater for a youngster, who doesn't have the experience and the knowledge to coutneract the material, hence, he falls into the trap of becoming an addict.

[leahcim]

Pornography that features violence and a total disregard for women does infact shape belief of youngsters

Indeed, it appears to have shaped you to an opinion that violence is wrong.

Much like rap music, pornography does set in the child's mind and etches beliefs. Since the child is young and hasn't had yet much experience in such matters

How much experience have you had in violent sexual activity, porn and/or shootin' mofos?
How has this experience led you to control your urge to rape women and kill black people unlike kids?

A study has shown(yes, I am going to resort this time to studies), that teenagers who listen to music with negative lyrics are more apposite at carrying out those lyrics.

How did your rap song "Eat da cabbage, learn da maths" fair?

Pornography consumes most space on the internet.

How much space is there on the internet? How did you measure it?
How much space is there taken up by cheese or religious fundamentalism.

Do you worry that youngsters might "stumble" across Catholicism and not have the wits to reject it? Do you believe that doing good things is merely something youngsters do because they don't have the experience to know better?

I'd be more inclinded to conject that the internet is a huge collection of disperate servers and not "a space" and that the number of servers and web pages is far too vast for anyone to seriously state what they contain. Not even google has a significant %age indexed and you probably haven't seen or looked at 0.00001%, or less of it, even if you've spent every day of your life until now, 365/24/7 without sleep or food browsing it.

[If you really want, you could spend the 365/24/7 from now until you die browsing and never ever look at a page / image or site that you find objectionable - if you want]

Therefore any statement of what it contains is merely their experiences [i.e what they search for and look at] or their prejudices [i.e what the Daily Mail tells them is on it]

If it were true that it was mostly porn wouldn't that suggest that so many people use porn that there's no conclusive link with it and anything?

Naturally, much of pornography falls into the hands of young children.

Rubbish.

It is a known fact that internet is the biggest time consumer of an average citizen.

Rubbish.

Consequently, pornography would be the most viewed aspect of internet, by children or otherwise.

Rubbish. Wasn't it computer games last week?

That naturally means that whatever the child sees, the child will more likely act out.

Act? Are you worried about women being raped or children being Brad Pitt?

More seriously where's the evidence?

1. Curiousity. The viewer stumbles upon the material and becomes enticed by it.

Rubbish. How do you "stumble" onto it?

2. Interest. The viewer starts to return to the material.

I think it fairly evident that an interest in sex predates photography, let alone the internet.

However, the outline is much greater for a youngster, who doesn't have the experience and the knowledge to coutneract the material, hence, he falls into the trap of becoming an addict.

Can you name some youngsters, 4 or 5, that you know personally who are (a) Addicted to pornography (b) Spend the vast majority of their time on the internet viewing porn and (c) Act out the scenes / violence in the pornography they've viewed.

[debussy symbolism]

I am not going to write a long response to you because our "debate" can go on forever, since our opposing viewpoints.

You are definately wrong about kids not "stumbling" onto pornography. It takes a mouseclick, and kids make lots of them. For us to have a conclusion an experiment would have to take place. Comparing 200 kids who have been exposed to pornography (violent) over their child and teenage life to the other 200 kids who haven't been exposed to pornoghaphy. Assessing the "results" would prove a most satisfactory answer, because right now, what you are saying is also "rubbish" (no offense) because you do not provide any clear evidence.

I am sorry about not clarifying the internet space thing, but that doesn't matter.

Without proof you can't say that kids either will or will not be affected in any way by pornography. If you want to indulge or have your son indulge in viewing pornography, go ahead, just keep in mind that to you pornography might be harmless, but to the kid it's not.

[debussy symbolism]

On the contrary, there is evidence of pornography somehow ending up harmind children, otherwise there wouldn't be so many antiporn and anti porn addiction sites on line. It is a fact that pornography is addicting to many. It is also a well known fact that addiction leads to dependance and dependance leads to bankrupcy and depression.

[prometheus]

That's quite a revolutionary and quite a rude thought. Perhaps to some extent it is true, with a relatively fit body, certain chemicals responsible for arousal are active.

You don't know what 'fitness' means. I even added "(in the Darwinian sense)" but even without it it should be understood because of the context. You already know what I want to say as is shown by your comment below this.


An animal that doesn't get aroused probably doesn't reproduce. This means this animal will probably not pass on its genes. And this means the trait will be eliminated from the gene pool of a species. Either there is no life, or there is life with enough fitness. And libido is important for fitness.

It is obvious that for a human male the vagina is the main focus of interests of the males libido. If the main focus of a human male's libido would be, lets say, the female's nose then this would reduce the fitness of this male, for reasons I don't want to go into.

So the existence of libido and the main focus are well explainable by my answer.


You already understand that a female with no breasts will have reduced fitness as well since the baby will probably die. Even with a modern substitute, research has shown human mother milk has beneficial effects on the baby, increasing it's fitness as well. But of course in modern times natural selection doesn't really work anymore.

Eventhough, the percentage of asexual people is suprisingly high.

[prometheus]

Oh so he is an adult. Then it's a different story.

Pornography makes a lot bigger 'impact' on adults than on children.

[debussy symbolism]

Are you talking about actually participating in pornography? Then yes, it is a bigger impact on adults. Physically that is. Children that view pornography are more prone to it's connotations of not valuing a woman.

[debussy symbolism]

No I do know what "fitness" means, I just used it in the wrong context.

[semme]

It’s very difficult to answer to that question as far as it is positively impossible to assess whether the arousal reaction is innate (genetic) or learned. To do so, one should have to take a male specimen, prevent him to see any female until he gets sexually mature and then expose him to a naked woman and see what happens.
Personally, I tend to lean on the learned part. This opinion is based on the fact that the notion of female sexual attractiveness varies from one man to another. Men are not equally attracted to the same parts of female body (mind you, gays are not attracted by female body at all).

first of all, hi, i didnt read further than this post. im just too tired.
 to his post. a few months ago, i read an interesting article in a well known magazine. to make it short, it dealt with humans who have been outcast or whatsoever in that sense. something like romolus and remus who were raised by a wolf-mom ( who founded rome). the point is, back in the 19 century, when they found such a human with no touch to society since his birth, they examined him of course.
some of the specific features those humans have "aquired" are not merely the toughness to manage cooking water poured on their hands, have no problems in being exposed to extreme coldness but also having no sexual arousement whereas a normal man would have been aroused. ( in this particular case)
as he was learning the language later on he explained, he never had any kind of compulsion to preserve the human species ( in the sexual way ). of course not, if hes never seen any woman before. he just stated that he used his errected penis to snap some nuts into the air, nothing more.

that, obviously led me to the conclusion that everytime we have a sexual arousal, its not generated from our innate organisation of our body, but rather the society with all its means to control, posses and guide us.

[prometheus]

Children that view pornography are more prone to it's connotations of not valuing a woman.

I think that children don't have any connotations concerning pornography. A naked human, to them, is like a naked animal. And they don't get sex puns. Children may see things adults don't want them to see without the child even realising they are seeing something special. Example; a vibrator.

Not valueing woman; think about it. If we are talking about pornography aimed at straight males then surely this values females. I guess you mean that males generally, or accidentally, I don't know too much about porn,, prefer pornography where females are put into humiliating positions/situations.

Pornography doesn't devalue females per se, though it seems male prefer porn that does. The fundamental message will be a naked body. The rest depends on the specific work.

[debussy symbolism]

With all of the sexual connotations in life, a child will be influenced by porn. Porn does devalue women and portrays male dominance. This naturally will influence the child to think that way of women and not care for their feelings.

[debussy symbolism]

Pornography doesn't devalue females per se, though it seems male prefer porn that does. The fundamental message will be a naked body. The rest depends on the specific work.

Pornography doesn't devalue women? Just hear of what they are referring to them. Those b.....s, etc.

[anekdote]

With all of the sexual connotations in life, a child will be influenced by porn. Porn does devalue women and portrays male dominance. This naturally will influence the child to think that way of women and not care for their feelings.

What the hell are you talking about! Porn does not portray male dominance. So basically you are saying that an exposed boob is male oppression? And as far as objectification goes, all heterosexual men lust for women and look for a stimulus of some sort (anyone who says otherwise is lying or gay). Yet anyone can look around them and see many interested, engaged couples. Are the men merely just playing the role of opportunist, suppressing their impulses in order to gain a "trophy"? If you think this is the case, then you are paranoid.

Porn as in naked bodies and depictions of sex does not hurt people emotionally or socially (with the exception of people who are mentally unstable in the first place). If a man regards a woman as a mere object, then porn is not the culprit. His environment and role models are to blame.

[leahcim]

You are definately wrong about kids not "stumbling" onto pornography. It takes a mouseclick, and kids make lots of them.

No, you are talking out of your hat. It takes a mouseclick, yes, but on something very specific that you haven't explained the presence of with "stumble"

because right now, what you are saying is also "rubbish" (no offense) because you do not provide any clear evidence.

Your post was full of "facts" that are clear fiction for which you didn't provide evidence, if you want evidence from me to show that, I'll provide it, but since you seem to believe that what I said was just my "viewpoint" you'll probably be better researching for yourself and seeing that what you guessed / read about the internet isn't actually true.

Your opinion / viewpoint is whatever it is, it might differ from mine. There are any number of "porn is bad" "oh no it isn't" posts in the thread to that effect. In that post you tried something differerent. You attemped to type "facts" that weren't true, about the internet, youngsters, rap and porn, i.e rubbish.

I am sorry about not clarifying the internet space thing, but that doesn't matter.

Of course it matters because what you said about the internet was and is absolute fiction. Complete garbage. Nonsense. Fantasy. You can't "clarify" it because it is just not true. Since your facts were false, the conclusions you drew from them were false too.

From that I suspect the opinions you drew from your conclusions might change given better information [however it's possible that your opinions were decided first, because I cannot believe you did any research to get your facts and start the ball rolling]

Without proof you can't say that kids either will or will not be affected in any way by pornography.

I can see that some of the conclusions you reached with false facts are, because of that, incorrect.

Further we all know, yourself included, that many positive effects could result if your ideas about rap songs, for example, were true. e.g Writing rap songs to affect behaviour in a way people might call "positive" could be done and there doesn't seem to be much stopping you doing it.

Try it, for one thing you'll give us all a laugh [I picture it'll be like the daughter of Tory criml Johnathan Aitkin] for another you won't have to suggest to me that I show my son porn to try and prove your point - just give us a rap song you've written to play to our sons and daughters that positively affect their behaviour in the way you believe rap does.

[ihatepop]

Greetings.

It has occured to me not such a while ago that men in general are more prone to a sexual arousal when exposed to various female genitalia, or other reproductive organs(breasts). I am under a state of obfustication concerning the matters, which I am sure aren't only alien to myself. I can't cease to stop pondering on why exactly do men experience such phenomenon. Is it the angles(I am sure you are familiar with the free stone masons )? What exactly provokes sexual desires on the male part when it comes to expose of the female body?

I do hope that no one is irate because of this discussion or question otherwise.

You're starting to sound like ana lingus, only he did it much worst....

Watch your back, debussy symbolism, look out for the moderators!

ihatepop

[thalbergmad]

Porn does devalue women and portrays male dominance.

This is not true.

Walk into any decent Sex Shop and you will find 100's of dominatrix vids.

Thal

[leahcim]

Walk into any decent Sex Shop and you will find 100's of dominatrix vids.

Indecent in decent?

[thalbergmad]

Porn does devalue women

That is not true, it gives them something to aspire to.

Like, go to the beauty parlour and get up the gym and you might look like Sylvia Saint.

Thal

[debussy symbolism]

Looks like most people are porn supporters here, interesting. Damaging or not, I will adhere to my beliefs and will no longer argue with yours. That said, if you think that pornography is harmless, go view it, no one's judging. I just prefer somethings to be not vastly exposed.

One last thing, supposing that pornography is "harmless" (whatever that would mean), it still shows the child that sex is okay. The child might therefore go out and be more prone to be seduced to sex. Possible side effects may arise such as STD and pregnancy, not to mention a violation of morals. I don't even want to hear the statement, "pornography doesn't encourage children to perform sexually" because it's not true. Again the only way to know this is to set up an experiment and see which group acts out sexually first.

[debussy symbolism]

Yes, I do not have dire facts, but neither do you. Again, the experiment comes to mind. So far, the general consensus is that porn does encourage sexuality in people, more so in kids.

For your satisfaction I will elide the notion of violent porn.

[debussy symbolism]

You're starting to sound like ana lingus, only he did it much worst....

Watch your back, debussy symbolism, look out for the moderators!

ihatepop

Am I stating porn? I am sure that the spammer had over 60 responces on his postings. This is a valid argument and an important one, hence the discussion.

[debussy symbolism]

Your post was full of "facts" that are clear fiction for which you didn't provide evidence, if you want evidence from me to show that, I'll provide it, but since you seem to believe that what I said was just my "viewpoint" you'll probably be better researching for yourself and seeing that what you guessed / read about the internet isn't actually true.

Okay, provide the evidence. I would naturally assume that you did a private "porn" study that somehow contradicts the predisposed beilefs.

I am sorry about stating that I wouldn't argue.

[debussy symbolism]

Further we all know, yourself included, that many positive effects could result if your ideas about rap songs, for example, were true. e.g Writing rap songs to affect behaviour in a way people might call "positive" could be done and there doesn't seem to be much stopping you doing it.

Try it, for one thing you'll give us all a laugh [I picture it'll be like the daughter of Tory criml Johnathan Aitkin] for another you won't have to suggest to me that I show my son porn to try and prove your point - just give us a rap song you've written to play to our sons and daughters that positively affect their behaviour in the way you believe rap does.

Humans have always somehow favored violence, or violent connotations. Suppose that there were the "rap" songs that encouraged positive behavior. Would that somehow ameliorate the situation and enforce the "positive" behavior? Maybe. Why don't you invent a positive rap song since you are so sapient about these matters. You are contradicting a belief, then prove your contradiction. I would like to see you invent a positive rap song and introduce it to the public. It will then be evident about the magnitude of interest of the public, compared to the interest of the already existent rap songs with their "bad' connotations.

[thalbergmad]

Why don't you invent a positive rap song since you are so sapient about these matters. .

Don't tempt him, he probably will.

I can speak with some authority about Porn films since I have been in a few. Being a pornstar has had no negative effects on me and i am completely normal.

My screen name was Rex Ruler.

Thal

[pianowolfi]

Don't tempt him, he probably will.

I can speak with some authority about Porn films since I have been in a few. Being a pornstar has had no negative effects on me and i am completely normal.

My screen name was Rex Ruler.

Thal

kidding eh? lol

[quasimodo]

I can speak with some authority about Porn films since I have been in a few. Being a pornstar has had no negative effects on me and i am completely normal.

My screen name was Rex Ruler.

Thal

Now you is gonna scare pianistimo even more  .

[leahcim]

I am sorry about stating that I wouldn't argue.

No worries. It hasn't had much effect on the amount of truth in your posts afaict

Argue? If you can't tell fact from fiction in your own posts, there's no point worrying about disagreeing with someone else

Be honest with yourself. If you honestly believe and researched to discover that, for example what you said before e.g "It is a known fact that internet is the biggest time consumer of an average citizen" / "pornography would be the most viewed aspect of internet, by children... " and "Pornography consumes most space on the internet." are true, then there's no point having a debate.

If you believe they are factually true then either you did no research into it [in which case, why would you say they were facts?] or the research you did was flawed. Either way, I don't expect to learn much from the exercise. YMMV.

[leahcim]

Don't tempt him, he probably will.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_Say_No