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

While I can appreciate why some parents might worry about children under the age of 18, 16, 13, 10, 8 etc viewing porn. That they are unprepared at what they might see. To that, I say prepare them. Talk to them, be understanding. Be open to the conversation.

In other words, do your damn job!

They will be fine if you do.
 
Darat said:
OK. I was wondering if that result may be like the claim that logging into Pornhub would have you presented with fictional violent porn and when I went and looked it wasn't.
Click to expand...
The study that found 1 in 8 titles violent (April 2021- Clare McGlynn and Fiona Vera-Gray) hasn't been challenged here as far as I am aware. I conceded that the claim by the French Equality watchdog (that it was as high as 90%) was not well evidenced. It's possible that the stats may have shifted since the McGlynn study. Pornhub may also have moved certain content off the front page. Whatever the case, the FTC say they should face crippling financial liabilities for content that was and is illegal. Your assertion that any violent porn is fictional (given Pornhub's track record) is surprising.
 
Skeptical Greg said:
No, the substance of the report ( for your purposes ) is about data reported b7 5-7 year olds. Which makes the report nonsense and potentially made up.
Click to expand...
The substance of the Global Witness report:
TikTok's search algorithm directs new 13-year-old users to porn, in apparent breach of new UK law

is in the title - it's about 13 year olds being fed porn. Here's a quote:

TikTok suggests sexually explicit search terms to 13-year-olds directing them to pornographic content in an apparent breach of the new UK Online Safety Act, a new Global Witness investigation finds. This happens despite the fact that the accounts were set up on clean phones with no search history, and that the accounts had TikTok’s "Restricted Mode" turned on, which is meant to protect users from sexually suggestive content.

You reference the part of the report that highlights how popular TikTok is - a number inflated by users who should not be on the platform (should by 13 years or older):
A recent report by Ofcom found that more than a quarter of five to seven-year-olds report using TikTok and a third of them do so unsupervised.
 
dirtywick said:
i agree that the problem is moderation on social media......
Click to expand...
According to the Glogal Witness report - no, not entirely:
Our point isn’t just that TikTok shows pornographic content to minor. It is that TikTok’s search algorithms actively push minors towards pornographic content. In other words, what we find here is not just a problem with content moderation, but also a problem with algorithmic content recommendation.
 
Darat said:
Can you tell me where this pornographic material is meant to be presented to kids? I've just created an account and lied about my age - I've set it up so that I was born in 2012, now logged in and the first thing I see is:

View attachment 64439

Across the top I see:

View attachment 64440
View attachment 64441

I've clicked on "Explore" and it displays 196 clips for me to look at, none of which from either the thumb nail or title have anything pornographic in them. On the "For you" two clips are shown one is titled "Tiktok Scam" and one has someone telling me they've just got the cutest make-up bag. I also can't find a "you may like" section.
Click to expand...
The report references the TikTok search bar.
Darat said:
Either TikTok has changed, or they were doing something else to see pornography.
Click to expand...
Global Witness state:
We gave TikTok the opportunity to comment on our findings and they said they took action on more than 90 pieces of content and removed some of the search suggestions that had been recommended to us, in English and other languages.

Whilst I applaud your post, if it were the case that your experience was the norm and Global Witness' was either false or some kind of freak anomaly (though they did created SEVEN accounts), why didn't TikTok say so? Instead they accepted there were issues and took action.

The report states that there were similar issues back in January - but that TikTok failed to sought them out.
 
Poem said:
The substance of the Global Witness report:
TikTok's search algorithm directs new 13-year-old users to porn, in apparent breach of new UK law

is in the title - it's about 13 year olds being fed porn. Here's a quote:

TikTok suggests sexually explicit search terms to 13-year-olds directing them to pornographic content in an apparent breach of the new UK Online Safety Act, a new Global Witness investigation finds. This happens despite the fact that the accounts were set up on clean phones with no search history, and that the accounts had TikTok’s "Restricted Mode" turned on, which is meant to protect users from sexually suggestive content.

You reference the part of the report that highlights how popular TikTok is - a number inflated by users who should not be on the platform (should by 13 years or older):
A recent report by Ofcom found that more than a quarter of five to seven-year-olds report using TikTok and a third of them do so unsupervised.
Click to expand...
Where is this pornography that is served up to kids without them searching for it?
 
arthwollipot said:
I don't know myself, but according to Darat it's kind of hard to find the porn on it.
Click to expand...
Though not according to Global Witness....and TikTok responded by making changes / removing material / removing search suggestions.
arthwollipot said:
In many ways, particularly after the Muskrat took over and started changing how it works.
Click to expand...
As in it's where most kids find porn - and rebranded by one such child as XXX.
 
Everything Poem keeps saying is based on the presumption that children are irrevocably harmed if they search for and or stumble upon pornographic images. Yet, there really isn't evidence for the claim.

All I ask is that he prove it. His response? Crickets. All we hear are crickets.
 
arthwollipot said:
No, they have not. You have consistently wishy-washied around the question. It takes practice to be that vague.
Click to expand...
The assumption that such material is harmful, especially to children, has been held by the majority of humanity since forever. If you want to show otherwise, then the onus is on you.
arthwollipot said:
Have you? Have you ever accidentally stumbled on porn on any platform? I haven't. I have to go looking for it. I have to know what I want, and I have to search for it, even on Twitter and Reddit.
Click to expand...
We have already discussed.
arthwollipot said:
I have repeatedly posted that what people see in movies does not affect their behaviour in any meaningful way. And I've backed this up with science.
Click to expand...
Already discussed. That you make porn the equivalent of watching a movie isn't perhaps surprising.
 
Last edited:
Poem said:
The assumption that such material is harmful, especially to children, has been held by the majority of humanity since forever. If you want to show otherwise, then the onus is on you.
Click to expand...
No it hasn't. The Romans, the Greeks etc did not think that. They didn't think that throughout most of East Asia even to this day.

But even if most of humanity thought something, that doesn't make it true. There was a time that most people thought the earth was flat and the Sun traveled it. Even today,, most people on the planet think there is a God. I can't disprove that crap either. But it's bs too.

But thanks for making my point. You haven't any proof for you claim. You want us all to accept it a priori.
My contention is that it hasn't ever been proved. No, this comes from religious socialization that sex is dirty and wrong. That's all. It's a relic of prudish puritanical upbringing.
.
Poem said:
We have already discussed this. Already discussed. That you make porn the equivalent of watching a movie isn't perhaps surprising.
Click to expand...
No, we damn well haven't. At least not enough to demonstrate there's a need for porn panic. Just admit it. You have no evidence.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom