• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Does 'rape culture' accurately describe (many) societies?

Poem said:
That's true. It would also be 'a good idea' to read what has been posted already; if you had you wouldn't have posted as you did.
Click to expand...


If you think you have already documented your alleged facts, you should should link to them when you make the claim again.
It's very easy if you know where they are, which I assume you do if they actually exist.
 
Poem said:
As with TragicMonkey's kitchen knives, your analogies don't equate - all the examples you give are, in general, beneficial for children but the porn we are discussing is illegal to show to them and severely harming them.
Click to expand...


Children having contact with fire or flammable fuels is highly dangerous, and children should not be using power tools either. Failure to separate children from these things would constitute child endangerment.

Dangerous things used by adults life fire and power saws can benefit children, of course. Such as providing shelter and warmth. Doing so does not constitute "dismemberment culture" or "arson culture."

What does porn provide that's beneficial to children? Children.
 
Myriad said:
Children having contact with fire or flammable fuels is highly dangerous, and children should not be using power tools either. Failure to separate children from these things would constitute child endangerment.

Dangerous things used by adults life fire and power saws can benefit children, of course. Such as providing shelter and warmth. Doing so does not constitute "dismemberment culture" or "arson culture."
Click to expand...

Which is my point - used properly, they benefit young people unlike porn which only harms them. How is this a valid analogy?

What does porn provide that's beneficial to children? Children.
Click to expand...

What?
 
Myriad said:
Children having contact with fire or flammable fuels is highly dangerous, and children should not be using power tools either. Failure to separate children from these things would constitute child endangerment.

Dangerous things used by adults life fire and power saws can benefit children, of course. Such as providing shelter and warmth. Doing so does not constitute "dismemberment culture" or "arson culture."
Click to expand...

It is possible for a child to have contact with fire and use, as you say, power tools and the like (and indeed to be in other such potentially dangerous scenarios) if they do so with extreme caution and under expert adult guidance. One wouldn't generally advise it, but it is possible. To do so with porn would not only be offensively abusive - it would be illegal.

I say again, your analogies don't equate.

Did you make a mistake or is this an example in itself of rape culture? Rape culture is a culture where sexual violence and abuse is normalised and played down.
 
Last edited:
Pornographers, via the internet with the complicity and encouragement of much of society is, de facto, showing porn to children. That is sexual abuse. Rape culture normalizes, trivializes or downplays such abuse and some here, knowingly or otherwise, have displayed such a culture.
 
dirtywick said:
probably worth reminding that this whole threaded started based on the product of basically what’s left of project veritas. not really sure quality of sources is a consideration
Click to expand...

It's clearly much more than just the evidence of 'Sound Investigations'.
 
Poem said:
It's clearly much more than just the evidence of 'Sound Investigations'.
Click to expand...

ok but it was a pretty heavily referenced piece of evidence for much of the thread and i feel how absolutely discredited that source is was really ever acknowledged, much like was just done with the american college of pediatricians. it makes me doubt a few of the other sources by association, and i’m not really interested enough to spend a ton of time researching or debating it at that point.

just to be clear, i think it’s pretty obviously harmful to expose kids to pornography in the volume and accessibility there is out there now. but i think quite a few of these sources overstate and slant the data and others are untrustworthy, and i think the solutions offered by the anti-porn side of the debate aren’t realistic or effective. towards that end i don’t think a very good case has been made.
 
dirtywick said:
ok but it was a pretty heavily referenced piece of evidence for much of the thread and i feel how absolutely discredited that source is was really ever acknowledged, much like was just done with the american college of pediatricians. it makes me doubt a few of the other sources by association, and i’m not really interested enough to spend a ton of time researching or debating it at that point.

just to be clear, i think it’s pretty obviously harmful to expose kids to pornography in the volume and accessibility there is out there now. but i think quite a few of these sources overstate and slant the data and others are untrustworthy, and i think the solutions offered by the anti-porn side of the debate aren’t realistic or effective. towards that end i don’t think a very good case has been made.
Click to expand...

We won't trouble you then.
 
i already got that impression the first time i brought all those points up.
 
dirtywick said:
i already got that impression the first time i brought all those points up.
Click to expand...

You got the wrong impression, but you definitely aren't interested enough to spend the time.

For those who are interested enough - the (already stated) fact that South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson and 25 other state attorneys general issued a letter to Pornhub demanding changes based on Sound Investigations’ videos should mean that we take them seriously.

The letter (Sep 29th 2023) states:

“As you are aware, various Federal and state laws forbid the creation and distribution of CSAM (Child Sexual Abuse Material). We are concerned that Aylo and its subsidiary Pornhub, and possibly other subsidiaries, may be proliferating the production and dissemination of CSAM through the 'loophole' identified by your employee. Please provide us with an explanation of this 'loophole;' whether Aylo and its subsidiaries do, in fact, permit content creators and performers to obscure their faces in uploaded content; and, if so, whether Aylo is taking measures to change this policy to ensure that no children or other victims are being abused for profit on any of its platforms.”
 
no i got it right, quality of sources isn’t important as long as they confirm what you’re saying. don’t address the criticism and continue on. just saw it live.

anyway good luck with your thing.
 
dirtywick said:
no i got it right, quality of sources isn’t important as long as they confirm what you’re saying. don’t address the criticism and continue on. just saw it live.

anyway good luck with your thing.
Click to expand...

? You have lost me dirtywick.
 
dirtywick said:
well sorry, i'm trying to be as clear as possible. maybe it's just me
Click to expand...

Were you being ironic when you said. 'Quality of source isn't important'?

26 US Attorney's General took Sound Investigations undercover work seriously. I don't know what else say.
 
i was not being ironic. veritas had a long history of fooling people with fake undercover investigations, and after o’keefe killed the thing with his financial fraud they just seem to have rebranded as sound investigations and produced the exact same style investigation. 26 ags taking it seriously doesn’t make them credible. so now you say what’s my evidence that this time they’re not telling the truth as if their long history of deception isn’t relevant. to me the balls in their court.

but i’m repeating myself. and so are you. so it is what it is.
 
dirtywick said:
i was not being ironic. veritas had a long history of fooling people with fake undercover investigations, and after o’keefe killed the thing with his financial fraud they just seem to have rebranded as sound investigations and produced the exact same style investigation. 26 ags taking it seriously doesn’t make them credible. so now you say what’s my evidence that this time they’re not telling the truth as if their long history of deception isn’t relevant. to me the balls in their court.

but i’m repeating myself. and so are you. so it is what it is.
Click to expand...


Evidence that Arden Young and Eric Cochran have misled us would be interesting. You haven't done that.

Pornhub were exposed by journalist Nicholas Kristof back in 2020, so it wouldn't be that surprising if they still hosted illegal content.

For someone who has said that:
"i’m not really interested enough to spend a ton of time researching or debating it..."

I wonder why you are continuing on this thread.
 
dirtywick said:
i was not being ironic. veritas had a long history of fooling people with fake undercover investigations, and after o’keefe killed the thing with his financial fraud they just seem to have rebranded as sound investigations and produced the exact same style investigation. 26 ags taking it seriously doesn’t make them credible. so now you say what’s my evidence that this time they’re not telling the truth as if their long history of deception isn’t relevant. to me the balls in their court.

but i’m repeating myself. and so are you. so it is what it is.
Click to expand...

Because?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom