• 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?

Darat said:
And they will get such phones from where?
Click to expand...
Are you saying that they can't get hold of a device without their parents knowledge? Remember, no internet is needed - just a flash drive from their mate.
 
Darat said:
How did the porn get on the flash drive?
Click to expand...
Could someone download it for them? Why did James Baker suggest that flash drives would be an option?

Your insistence that the responsibility is with the parents isn't borne out by the research. Children should be able to access all that is good and beneficial to them on the net (see the UN) but most of society has decided to put porn first.
 
Article 17 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) grants children the right to access information from a wide variety of sources, including the media, and places a responsibility on governments to ensure that this information promotes their well-being and that they are protected from harmful material.
 
Poem said:
Are you saying that they can't get hold of a device without their parents knowledge? Remember, no internet is needed - just a flash drive from their mate.
Click to expand...
How about pencils and paper? Someone could draw a pornographic picture, and then kids could get hold of it. Clearly pencils and paper must be outlawed. For the sake of the children!!!
 
TragicMonkey said:
How about pencils and paper? Someone could draw a pornographic picture, and then kids could get hold of it. Clearly pencils and paper must be outlawed. For the sake of the children!!!
Click to expand...
If nations decided that porn was just simple bad for all of society (especially children), then presumably laws would reflect that.

A pencil drawing is no comparison to what children are access online. You know that.

Do you think it is a good thing that we are teaching children that anything-goes-sex is just fine? That we are doing that is a fact.
 
Poem said:
Using a flash drive would be an easy work around for UK children who have grown up with porn. I don't see that you have demonstrated any 'reduced harm'.

We are teaching children that almost total unrestricted sexual freedom is just fine (the actors are real people having real sex after all). That should be a wake-up call.

Do you think that reflects well on humanity?
Click to expand...
If everyone consented and no one got hurt or exploited, then yes, it would reflect well on humanity. I have already outlined how I think children (and adults) could be protected online, while not restricting adults from engaging in and publishing their sexual activity or fantasies for other adults to watch, read or think about while masturbating, or as inspiration for things to try with their own sexual partners.
 
By the time a young person can go buy a secondhand laptop or a tablet or an old phone with no sim and a usb adapter for themselves at a shop or off a friend you can't stop them getting porn from a friend or an under-the-radar website. You actually can't.

Best case scenario is pretty bad in itself: parents searching through a teenager's stuff to find and take away the devices the kid got for themselves. This kind of intrusion is arguably appropriate for drug posession; it is not IMO appropriate for 'you could be looking at (xyz thing)' fishing.

And the amount and kind of stuff you'd have to do to try would be police-state level ◊◊◊◊.

I'd be far, FAR more interested in attempting legislation (as long as nobody wants to do the appropriate thing, which is education) to keep kids from falling for scams, cults, predators, shotgun blasts of AI slop unintentional disinformation, unintentional algorithmic mind-benders and non-sane AI chat partners than porn.

Hell, fully stop regulating the porn access and just ask everyone to put the nicest vanilla stuff on top where that's what you see 'by accident.'
 
Last edited:
Poem said:
Could someone download it for them? Why did James Baker suggest that flash drives would be an option?

Your insistence that the responsibility is with the parents isn't borne out by the research. Children should be able to access all that is good and beneficial to them on the net (see the UN) but most of society has decided to put porn first.
Click to expand...
It's your hypothetical not mine. To the two questions you asked my answer is "don't know" and "don't know - have you asked him?"
 
Darat said:
This is a long thread so folk may not know but Poem's "consider the children" is a wedge strategy - Poem thinks all porn should be banned and would do even if you could have perfect controls that stopped any child from ever being able to access porn.
Click to expand...

In addition, the definition of porn that he's offered as the legal standard includes anatomy textbooks, illustrated instructions for tampon use and barrier contraceptive use, classical painting and sculpture, and any photo or drawing or performance of people kissing. Every movie and television episode with a PG-framed bedroom scene would be banned too, as that too is sexual activity visually depicted.
 
Myriad said:
In addition, the definition of porn that he's offered as the legal standard includes anatomy textbooks, illustrated instructions for tampon use and barrier contraceptive use, classical painting and sculpture, and any photo or drawing or performance of people kissing. Every movie and television episode with a PG-framed bedroom scene would be banned too, as that too is sexual activity visually depicted.
Click to expand...
Demonstrate that a porn ban would have that effect. What are you suggesting - that parents kissing would be proscribed?
 
Poem said:
Demonstrate that a porn ban would have that effect. What are you suggesting - that parents kissing would be proscribed?
Click to expand...
It's up to you to show the wording of a porn ban that could not be interpreted to proscribe these things.

We already see the current attempt in the UK landing on Wikipedia, of all things.
 
Last edited:
Poem said:
You are suggesting that showing children only the porn that passes that 'test' (as you define it) would be fine?
Click to expand...
If you mean vanilla sex (as I defined it previously), then I think it would be harmless. E.g., two people giving and receiving physical pleasure, experiencing orgasm and the hit of the empathy enhancing hormone oxytocin.

What do you believe happens to children who watch adults having sex such as this?
 
Lithrael said:
It's up to you to show the wording of a porn ban that could not be interpreted to proscribe these things.

We already see the current attempt in the UK landing on Wikipedia, of all things.
Click to expand...
Already posted that wikipedia has a porn problem.
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
If you mean vanilla sex (as I defined it previously), then I think it would be harmless. E.g., two people giving and receiving physical pleasure, experiencing orgasm and the hit of the empathy enhancing hormone oxytocin.

What do you believe happens to children who watch adults having sex such as this?
Click to expand...
Showing porn to a child is sexual abuse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom