Pornography, should it be banned?
- Thread starter DrScoobs
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Your friend is spouting talking points from a certain subset of feminists who are anti-porn; it's the same subset which, on its extreme end, sees all heterosexual sex as being inherently rape.DrScoobs said:
Porn certainly does objectify women, but it objectifies men in equal proportion; everyone involved is a sex object, it's kind of the point.
It may set unrealistic standards for sex, but that's hardly a reason to ban it.
Sex slaves may make a portion of the porn in the world, but not the majority of the stuff that we're watching in the west -- and what's more, the stuff that is made with sex slaves is exactly the stuff that would wind up on the black market if such a ban were created. In fact, a ban on porn would if anything encourage black market slave-made porn, not discourage it.
I'd like to see a source for the 98% of female performers being unhappy quote; no source, no credibility on a statistic like that I'm afraid.
If lack of porn meant lack of sex crime, presence of violent videogames would mean rise in violent crime; the violent crime rate has been dropping consistently for about 20 years now. I'd imagine that includes rape, for that matter.
I seriously doubt a drop in porn would mean a drop in human trafficking; (forced)prostitution and porn service two different markets.
Moral of the story: your friend is an idealistic prude with a very warped view of pornography.
This idea has been debunked so many times. The best debunking I saw recently was a 'freakonomics' style look at how the rate of take up of access to the internet (and presumably porn) in US different states tallied with the rate of decrease in rape. It works out as the faster the internet take up the quicker the decrease in rape.....DrScoobs said:
You can read it about it here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/30/smut_freakonomics/
Now of cause correlation is not causation, but the logic looks pretty good. Unless there is another mechanism that makes a state want more internet and to rape less. Maybe it's is all those cat videos on youtube that take away those rapey urges.....
People are going to shoot this down by claiming rape is entirely about control, and has absolutely nothing at all to do with sex in any case ever. Fair warning.ph0b0s123 said:
Captcha: barking mad
seems appropriate.
I love that first point, that porn (in general, apparently) objectifies women. Pretty sure all my gay porn is exempt from all that.
We kind of need pornography for you know... happy happy ALONE -_- time, most people tend to find it excessively difficult without porn to watch. This special is incredibly beneficial for people by lowering stress, slight exercise, not to mention personal enjoyment, through it's gigantic rush chemicals through the body. If I recall correctly it can extend your life by 5 years if done frequently.
I think the problem lies totally with the way it's handled, it's a case where so much porn is next to prostitution, where all it takes is a camera and some license I think to make it legal.
I think the problem lies totally with the way it's handled, it's a case where so much porn is next to prostitution, where all it takes is a camera and some license I think to make it legal.
Now I'm confused. Porn is bad because it shows sex which encourages people to rape. But then Rape is not about sex but control, so why then is porn bad again if sex has nothing do with it?Owyn_Merrilin said:
That's a rather schizophrenic argument. Or was I expecting too much with looking for logic.
The two ideas are from two different waves of feminism. The anti-porn one was a fringe element from a now old-school and relatively uncommon branch of feminism. The porn is not about sex thing is a part of the modern wave of feminism that brought you the slut walk. As far as I know, it's long been believed that rape was mostly about power, but it's really only in recent years that it's become a mainstream belief that it is exclusively about power, and sex is nothing but a means of achieving it.ph0b0s123 said:
your friend is wrong. I was going to say something meaner, but I don't know him. I just know that (at least in my opinion) he's completely wrong about Porn. He sounds like one of those abstinence only advocates which is a whole other kettle of fish that I believe is actually pretty horrible.DrScoobs said:
- Pornography objectifies both men and women. I'd go so far as to say Porn itself probably tends to objectify men more then women - in Porn, men are nothing but objects, usually penises, mostly off screen. Sure, people use Porn (read: almost fucking everyone) will objectify women to help themselves... enjoy.. the show, but that's just how dirty thoughts work.
- Sets Unrealistic Expectations? So? Porn probably won't make you a great lover, but then, lots of women like porn, and like to be treated just the way the girls in porn do. So maybe your friend just needs to find more interesting women? They're out there. The only real unrealistic expectations I find with porn is based on the fact that porn is meant to be watched. Everything is open, and that's just not how sex works most of the time. Things that are awesome become uncomfortable when you're also having sex with a camera.
- Human Trafficking.. We have laws for that, and I for one don't tend to watch "human trafficking porn". At least I don't think I do. I'd say "Human Trafficking Porn" should be illegal in the same vein that Beastiality and Kiddie Porn are illegal (at least Making it. It would suck to go to jail because you like asian women and that thai girl was actually trafficked to malaysia to make a video) - crimes are involved, so make it illegal. You don't need to destroy the industry to fight what I'm sure is actually a fairly small segment of pornography - most pornography is done by Porn Stars. They're not trafficked anywhere but the Dunkin Donuts.
- bullshit statistic is bullshit. Either the number was completely pulled out of his ass (as 72.56% of numbers are), or the study was biased and not scientifically valid. Perhaps they asked leading questions and came to erroneous results. I imagine if Porn Actors were unhappy with their job, they'd stop. Noones holding a gun to their head, unless of course, they're being trafficked.
- Drop in Crime Rate... Crime isn't something that's easy to quantify. There are tons of factors that go into just figuring it out. It's foolish to just say something like "doing this will cause this to happen to the crime rate" It's usually the things you don't notice that have interesting effects on crime. I think I agree with you - people who have sexual urges that might lead to a crime can let off steam using porn, and probably LESS rapes take place because of porn. The people who rape AND watch porn, would probably rape more readily without porn.
- Kids finding Porn. Literally throwing the baby out with the bathwater, lol. Kids aren't destroyed by porn. It's the parents job to help guide their children into adulthood, and it's the child's job to try and undermine that at every possibilty - it's the ultimate test of parenthood, dealing with your kids. But even if Porn is harmful to kids (and I don't really think it is), is it so harmful that we need to throw it away entirely? that just seems silly. I think we ALL have the story about how porn influenced our childhoods. I certainly have porn stories from when I was a kid, but that's just part of being a kid. It's important that it's there for them to find. Like... it's important. Kids need porn as much as anyone else, and I can't believe I just said that. I'm not saying we should sell porn to kids. I'm not saying kids SHOULD be watching porn. All I'm saying is, it's part of growing up, learning about the opposite sex (or your own sex) in a safe environment is important.
- Again with the human trafficking. I don't understand this. I guess it's the same argument with prostitutes. There's no possible way ANYONE could enjoy having sex, so they have to bring in slaves. Give me a break. I'm not denying it's out there, but it's not SO rampant that an industry that has shaped technology and media in general in the way that porn has (VHS and Blu Ray were both chosen by pornographers, and they both beat their competition)
Banning it will just force it all underground. Remember that the sex industry is the single oldest industry in human history. A fancy new law won't make it go away, it will just turn it all into a black market with no rules. And if the government were to regulate it all the sex slaves involved wouldn't be an issue, but even our liberal politicians are afraid to even mention porno.
- Pornography completely objectifies women
well yes and no. if your straight occurs there is going to be women in the act
- Many sex slaves in the world are linked to pornography
really, ok even though you will il legalized porn, theres going to be a black market
- 98% of female performers in pornography are unhappy (Apparently from a real study according to him)
maybe that is kinda true, but you will get tired doing the same things over and over,(even eating your favorite food everyday, it will eventually get tired)
- If pornography was banned, it would mean a drop in human trafficking (again, an opinion I think completely the opposite to)
many criminals that do human traffic are for prostitution (having sex for money, with any guy)
well yes and no. if your straight occurs there is going to be women in the act
- Many sex slaves in the world are linked to pornography
really, ok even though you will il legalized porn, theres going to be a black market
- 98% of female performers in pornography are unhappy (Apparently from a real study according to him)
maybe that is kinda true, but you will get tired doing the same things over and over,(even eating your favorite food everyday, it will eventually get tired)
- If pornography was banned, it would mean a drop in human trafficking (again, an opinion I think completely the opposite to)
many criminals that do human traffic are for prostitution (having sex for money, with any guy)
that comment kind of bothers me for some reason,Altorin said:
I dont think somone should feel bad about not being comfortable with certian things, I don't know what goes on in porn but I dont think anyoen should be "expected" to like certain things...
Considering that 90% of men have already been practicing masturbation, often chronically, since the age of 15, I imagine any attempt to outright ban pornography would be remarkably unsuccessful.
Incidentally, assuming most porn-actresses are unhappy in their careers (which they aren't), why don't we give the same care for all the wage-slaves in their miserable occupations.
This reeks of moral panic. If people cared just this much about the plight of the worker around the world, I suppose I wouldn't be so defensive. But people only give a shit if it somehow involves Johnny-Long-Dick.
This reeks of moral panic. If people cared just this much about the plight of the worker around the world, I suppose I wouldn't be so defensive. But people only give a shit if it somehow involves Johnny-Long-Dick.
A. So does most of the media. Therefore I think we should ban the news.DrScoobs said:
2. This is a true, but just like most media you need to be mature enough to view/play it.
C. 98 percent of my coworkers are unhappy with their jobs. Lets get rid of restaurants. Honestly, I think I know 5 people total who are happy with their job. Those people are older and have established themselves in a career. Also, why just females? Porn isn't a walk in the park for males either. At least women make 3-5 times more money. By the way, ask for a source on that. That number seems way too high.
D. What is the reasoning for that? Also, what constitutes a "sexual crime"? Rape? Bad touch? Me staring at someone's cleavage?
E. We should also ban sharp things, electricity, and stove tops so children don't get into those by accident.
F. Here's the thing with human trafficking: it is illegal already. People are still going to do it if a medium becomes illegal. (also I seemed to have skipped the third point you listed. This addresses that one too.)
I made the comment hastily but I didn't quite mean that. All I mean is, it doesn't HAVE to set unreasonable expectations. The argument of "unreasonable expectations" usually comes with the idea that women don't like doing certain things and we should feel bad for wanting them. I just think that argument is bullshit. That's really what I meant, and you might still disagree, but that's a little clarification. Of course someone shouldn't feel like they HAVE to do something, and if someone incorrectly expects you to, I completely think you should tell them to get stuffed. I just don't think "unreasonable expectations" is a very good argument against pornographyVault101 said: