I don't think it's a joke

[Mr. Teatime]

Here

 

I thought it was satire at first, but now I think this guy is serious.

[Monte Carlo]

Have you, seriously, not considered the link between pornography in a very small but dangerous minority of men and their gradual progression to become sex offenders? On a lesser level, men who suffer from what tabloids like to call "sex addiction" end up leading pretty destructive lives as a result. Again, this sort of fixation with porn can be an early indicator.

 

OK, there is also the religious angle here too, but there are men who are literally addicted to this sort of material. People can suffer from mental illnesses like compulsive-obsessive disorder that fixate on any number of stimuli. I ain't a shrink, but I know a few psychiatric nurses and cops, and they'll tell you that an unhealthy obsession with porn is often Step One on a career as a sex offender.

 

Personally, I think people can have a perfectly healthy and interesting experience with graphically erotic pictures, art and literature on all sorts of levels. Ditto alcohol. Or exercise. And so on....but there will always be people who fixate on something to the extent that they begin to threaten others.

 

I'm an atheist, but if one man who rationalises his sexual problems through religion as a result of that site then the whole exercise will have been worthwhile in my humble.

 

Cheers

MC

[taks]

Have you, seriously, not considered the link between pornography in a very small but dangerous minority of men and their gradual progression to become sex offenders?

no.

seriously.

these types are going to get their fix one way or another. the same argument can be used for just about anything to control what the public has access too. at some point, it's nothing more than control. we can't write laws willy nilly for the freaks in life that refuse to behave responsibly. they commit a crime, they are punished for said crime. the "reason" behind their crime can be argued in court as mitigating or otherwise...

 

taks

[Monte Carlo]

no.

 

Okay.

 

seriously.

 

Double Okay.

 

these types are going to get their fix one way or another.

 

That's true. Online porn is just one outlet. But unlike other types of material, it's instantly available at the click of a mouse. Hey, I know! 'Cuz people are gonna get their "fix" one way or another let's legalize heroin, murder, incest and every type of wacko taboo-breaking porn EVAR! Problem solved.

 

Remember, folks, a Liberal is somebody so open-minded their brain fell out.

 

the same argument can be used for just about anything to control what the public has access too.  at some point, it's nothing more than control.  we can't write laws willy nilly for the freaks in life that refuse to behave responsibly.

 

Did you actually visit the website Mr. Teatime linked? It's a voluntary service for people who think they need it. The only control under discussion is self-control. So hold your horses, Mark. And, FWIW, yes we bloody well can write laws for the people who refuse to behave responsibly. In fact, the penal code in every society on the planet was formulated to deal with that very eventuality when you think about it. Duh.

 

they commit a crime, they are punished for said crime.  the "reason" behind their crime can be argued in court as mitigating or otherwise...

 

What on earth this has to do with anything under discussion here is beyond me. Point Not Found.

[EnderAndrew]

Remember, folks, a Liberal is somebody so open-minded their brain fell out.

 

I started out as a Liberal. More and more I have to agree with your assessment.

[Aurora]

Remember, folks, a Liberal is somebody so open-minded their brain fell out.

 

Funny, then, that I'm a liberal and have problems with most porn.

[EnderAndrew]

I have a problem that most porns seems to fixuate on underage girls.

 

Back when Altavista was the big search engine, they used to list the most commonly looked up terms.

 

Lolita was at number 3. That frightens me.

[taks]

Did you actually visit the website Mr. Teatime linked? It's a voluntary service for people who think they need it. The only control under discussion is self-control. So hold your horses, Mark. And, FWIW, yes we bloody well can write laws for the people who refuse to behave responsibly. In fact, the penal code in every society on the planet was formulated to deal with that very eventuality when you think about it. Duh.

yes, i read it. i was merely referring to your mention of the tiny percentage of people that may extend their porn activities to violence. an argument that is unprovable other than said "citizens gone awry" testimony... and more often than not, such perpetrators are looking for someone to blame for their problems.

 

remember MC, a liberal is actually somebody that thinks everyone else is to blame for his lot in life. hardly me.

 

they commit a crime, they are punished for said crime.

[Monte Carlo]

Modern Dilemma:

 

There are two types of Liberals, aren't there? The 19th Century classical Liberal (free economist, small government, lassez-faire approach to stuff) and the 20-21st Century illiberal Liberal (tax and spend, big centralized government, uptight politically correct approach to everything).

 

I'm referring, of course, to the second.

 

Cheers

MC

[taks]

There are two types of Liberals, aren't there? The 19th Century classical Liberal (free economist, small government, lassez-faire approach to stuff) and the 20-21st Century illiberal Liberal (tax and spend, big centralized government, uptight politically correct approach to everything).

so exactly how do i fit into that group?

 

taks

[Monte Carlo]

The fact of the matter is this:

 

There will be a guy who is heavily into porn. After aperiod of time he goes to the extreme end of the spectrum to satisfy his needs. Even this bores him. So he starts exposing himself in parks to women. This, too, eventually bores him. He begins to attack women.

 

This isn't a "conservative" pitch to justify censorship (I don't as a rule), it's a very common profile of a classic-or-garden sex offender as developed by police and profilers. It isn't the porn that made him do it. That's an argument that interestingly is adopted by both hard-line conservatives and illiberal liberals.

 

However, it would be strange not to consider the role the porn played in the process. Had the guy realised earlier that he had a problem, and that his pretty wacko and non-stop need for such material was a symptom, could he not have sought help? Thus breaking the chain and averting a potential offender (and thereby preventing the creation of a victim)?

 

Here in the UK we are having a debate about a certain type of porn after a murder that revolved around the offender's obsession with it (I will not mention the ouvre as it's pretty offensive). This type of material is, it is fair to say, not a matter of sexual preference or taste but instead indicative of psychological illness. So I say ban it. Yep, that's right, BAN IT.

 

This is where "free speech" liberalism gets to the point where brains fall out. There cna be no licence without restraint. The point where we decide how to exercise that restraint is an important one for mature reflection, but it must be done nonetheless.

 

Need we remind ourselves that the USA is a country that has the world's largest and most profitable sex industry (and good luck to them as compared to the Eastern European and Asian versions it appears well-regulated and less exploitative) yet literally wets itself with worry over a woman's nipple appearing on primetime TV. That's denial.

 

Cheers

MC

[Monte Carlo]

Mark, we are simultaneously posting. The post wasn't aimed at you.

[taks]

Mark, we are simultaneously posting. The post wasn't aimed at you.

yeah... but your comment about the brain falling out was

 

before i go any further... grrrr... damn CTRL key is having issues. ugh.

 

anyway,

 

There will be a guy who is heavily into porn. After aperiod of time he goes to the extreme end of the spectrum to satisfy his needs. Even this bores him. So he starts exposing himself in parks to women. This, too, eventually bores him. He begins to attack women.

 

This isn't a "conservative" pitch to justify censorship (I don't as a rule), it's a very common profile of a classic-or-garden sex offender as developed by police and profilers. It isn't the porn that made him do it. That's an argument that interestingly is adopted by both hard-line conservatives and illiberal liberals.

the porn did not, and i'm assuming that's what you agree with so i'll leave it at that. this is a classic correlation/causation issue. yes, i agree that sexual offenders often use/read porn. i think statistics indicate as much. very strong correlation. but not causation.

 

i don't think porn (stepping into hard-core opinion now) causes anything. i think it is an outlet they explore, but without that outlet, they would have found another. like saying marijuana creates heroin addicts. well, a lot more folks smoke pot than do harder drugs, so it must not be a rule. i turned out ok smoking pot as a kid...

 

we don't have denial, btw, i think we truly don't want children exposed to adult themed concepts. the hard left wants demorilization... maybe amoralization? the conservatives want strict biblical fire and brimstone approach to sin... i'm in the middle, personally. as a result of the strong opinions... the edge gets pushed and we end up with janet showing nipplage and the outcry to boot... ugh (i thought what she did was tasteless, but so are the scantilly clad cheerleaders and cameramen focused on THEIR nipples...).

 

taks

[EnderAndrew]

I agree.

 

I don't beleive the porn is a vehicle to violence. It just happens to be a lifestyle accessory that gets blamed.

 

My mother firmly believes that homosexuality eqautes directly to pedophilia. It's scary. There are those that are convinced that all Priests are pedophiles.

 

So, we can then deduce that all Priests are gay, and have large porn collections.

[taks]

yes, but now we have a website where these poor evengelical pedophiliac porn addicts (PEPPAs) can ease their pain and address their problem.

 

taks

[EnderAndrew]

Addiction is addiction. And the mindset of addiction is quite frightening. I hope they get help.

[LostStraw]

Drinking alcohol is not necessarily bad.. being an alcoholic usually is. The same can be said for pornography. If someone lets it control them it could lead to destructive tendencies. Just like there's AA I don't see how a PA could be a bad thing.

[taks]

probably not, LostStraw... i think any sarcasm i've had was merely to highlight how far off i had steered this topic... well, in a related vein, but still OT.

 

i'd imagine sex addiction is recognized as a true addiction by whatever medical/psychiatric association(s) make the recoginzations... of course, if done properly (with a like minded mate), there's certainly something to be said for the benefits of such a malady.

 

taks

[EnderAndrew]

Hey, Jesus (who most people believe was a decent person) turned water into wine. It can't be all that bad.

 

People have a tendency to blame tools rather than their fellow man.

 

Let's look back to Columbine. People blame guns, or blame the media. Clinton blamed movies (Basketball Diaries featured a school schooting fantasy) and the Doom computer game. ESPN did a special on the football team, and how they were heroes. Last time I checked, the two murderous bastards claimed they were pushed to violence when they were repeatedly beaten for years by the same football players and the administration and parents both refused to do anything. The two perps also filmed their planning over the course of a year. There are pictures of them walking past their parents with a duffel bag full of guns clearly sticking out, and their parents never questioned where they got the guns, or what they planned to do.

 

There was a paper-trail showing how the administration had been told countless times these kids were being beaten. There were pictures of the bruises. I'm not condoning the shootings, but I would hardly call the bullies on the football team heroes simply because they survived and continued to throw around a football.

 

When I was a kid, there was a student in elementary school caught with drugs in his Trapper Keeper. So, the entire school district banned Trapper Keepers are tools of the drug trade. Beepers were already banned for similiar reasons.

 

Common sense just escapes people.

[taks]

odd that none of the bullies was killed... some people just go wonky.

taks

[EnderAndrew]

I don't recall if it was poor planning or what. They could have ambushed football practice directly.

 

The kids weren't deluded. They knew they were going to die, and be killed by police fire. I think they were trying to get as high of a body count as possible to add to their infamy IIRC.

[taks]

I don't recall if it was poor planning or what. They could have ambushed football practice directly.

 

The kids weren't deluded. They knew they were going to die, and be killed by police fire. I think they were trying to get as high of a body count as possible to add to their infamy IIRC.

 

please excuse me if i reversed the roles of these two guys...

 

back on topic, i don't think either of these guys needed the services of the porn addiction website.

 

taks

no, it wasn't poor planning. dylan kleebold wanted people to die. eric harris was suicidal and depressed. dylan is the sort that would have been a serial killer if he had not been tempered by eric. that said, dylan was deluded... psychopathic, actually. if i can find the link to the "analysis" i read, i'll post it.

 

taks

[Aurora]

You know, I'll cheerily agree there are plenty of people blame external sources for their behavior or that of others when they shouldn't. I think it's ridiculous, however, to argue that the media and such have little to no influence on anyone's behavior. There have been plenty of studies from all over the political spectrum to show that violent video games and movies and pornography really screw with people's brains. Just at a brief search:

 

http://www.corrections.com/njaca/LatestQua...s_adolescen.htm

 

http://www.dianarussell.com/pornsrole.html

 

http://www.dianarussell.com/pornsrole2.html

 

http://www.dianarussell.com/furtherfindings.html

 

http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/yout...ndix4bsec2.html

 

http://www.mercola.com/2000/jun/3/children_tv.htm

 

http://www.troubledwith.com/stellent/group...ckground%20Info

 

http://www.clarkson.edu/class/tc310/groupd/Mass_Media1.htm

 

 

I don't think that watching a few violent tv shows turns "normal" people into serial killers, but I think it's a mistake to consider tv and movies and pornography harmless visual images with absolutely no affect on anyone who's not already crazy anyway. When you're soaking in the media (especially porn - orgasm is a powerful conditioner), it's not just bouncing harmlessly away from you.

['JN]

If your hand or your foot causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life maimed or crippled than to have two hands or two feet and be thrown into eternal fire.

(Whole Chapter: Matthew 18 In context: Matthew 18:7-9)

 

No thanks, I think I'll take my chances. They wonder why people become atheists?

 

Yeah, let's not deal with the problem itself, let's just physically harm those involved, or else they're going to hell...

[Phoenix19-15-5]

I like porn....look it up every day. Porn is good...to an extent. :D