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

everyone is biased, but the evidence is lacking. i can go to a porn site right now and pull up the barely legal category and it's not a bunch of women acting like children. i think you could make a case that it's offensive and damaging to do so, and certainly videos of that nature exist and are on the internet, but it's also a complete misrepresentation of what one would typically find on the sites you're trying to scrub.
 
dirtywick said:
everyone is biased, but the evidence is lacking. i can go to a porn site right now and pull up the barely legal category and it's not a bunch of women acting like children. i think you could make a case that it's offensive and damaging to do so, and certainly videos of that nature exist and are on the internet, but it's also a complete misrepresentation of what one would typically find on the sites you're trying to scrub.
Click to expand...
Given the concerns over such content, I would assume tube sites wouldn't shove it in anyone's face - initially at least.
 
Children's charities, child experts and the NPCC have been warning of the dangers of harmful barely legal internet content for years and the UK government is intending to ban it.

If I were a tube site pornographer, I'd make sure such content was not anywhere near the first page.
 
The legacy of porn advocates (have posted this before and - WARNING: CONTAINS DISTURBING CONTENT):


Documentary made by Magic Lantern Pictures (a Christian group).
 
Last edited:
Let's say "barely legal" porn was banned. What effects would you expect to see? How many resources would go into policing this ban? Could the same amount of resources be used to achieve even bigger improvements for societal problems?
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
Let's say "barely legal" porn was banned. What effects would you expect to see? How many resources would go into policing this ban? Could the same amount of resources be used to achieve even bigger improvements for societal problems?
Click to expand...
Mandela: There can be no keener revelation of a society's soul than the way in which it treats it's children.
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
So the main effect is to make people such as yourself feel better?
Click to expand...
No.

I agree with Mandela about the fundamentals of how we should treat children. We aren't going to fix society unless we at least get that aspect right. Barely legal (of the type where the actors are made to look like children) is a disgraceful indictment of a society who's focus is on pleasure through entertainment. Same with the fact that we are showing kids porn.
 
Poem said:
They don't know? Perhaps you should email them and disabuse them of the need for the following -

Crime and Policing Bill (April 2025):
This amendment, tabled by Jess Asato MP, would extend content regulations that already exist for pornography distributed offline to pornography distributed online. This amendment is necessary to ensure what is illegal offline is illegal online and thereby combat the proliferation of violence against women in online pornography.

The sexualisation of children
3. The current laws regulating pornographic content do not go far enough to protect adults and children from the harms of pornography.

4. Since 1984, legislation has existed to specifically prohibit offline content that the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) would find unsuitable for classification, including in the R18 category, on videos, DVDs and Blu-Ray. This includes pornographic content which depicts illegal activity such as rape or incest, and any material that is potentially harmful, for example because it depicts and/or promotes child sexual abuse, trafficking, or violent sexual acts.

5. There is no equivalent standard to the BBFC’s regulation for online pornographic content as the internet has evolved largely without regulatory oversight.
(My emphasis)
Click to expand...
Not the same thing at all, that is talking about a regulatory system, not what is illegal or legal. My point remains the same - porn which attempts to depict the performers as being under 18 is already illegal in the UK, there is no such thing as barely legal porn, it is either legal or not. Remember this all goes back to you asking if someone would be happy to let someone who watches barely legal porn look after their kids. As I've pointed out several time - what you was in fact asking was would you be happy for someone to look after your kids if you knew they watched legal porn, which in the UK means porn that does not depict anyone under the age of 18 or having the appearance of being under 18.

Personally, I would not hand the BBFC anymore power, they are crap at what they are already paid to do. (I have had run-ins with the BBFC in the past.) Private companies should not have such powers; it should be a public body with full accountability.
 
Poem said:
Children's charities, child experts and the NPCC have been warning of the dangers of harmful barely legal internet content for years and the UK government is intending to ban it.

If I were a tube site pornographer, I'd make sure such content was not anywhere near the first page.
Click to expand...
No it isn't.
 
Poem said:
No.

I agree with Mandela about the fundamentals of how we should treat children. We aren't going to fix society unless we at least get that aspect right. Barely legal
(of the type where the actors are made to look like children)
is a disgraceful indictment of a society who's focus is on pleasure through entertainment. Same with the fact that we are showing kids porn.
Click to expand...
Which is why in our society such pornography is illegal.
 
Poem said:
Available on the internet throughout the world,
including the UK, with impunity.
Your argument is an exercise in sophistry.
Click to expand...
Evidence?

The sophistry is your framing to make it appear that such material is currently legal in the UK.
 
Last edited:
Poem said:
No.

I agree with Mandela about the fundamentals of how we should treat children. We aren't going to fix society unless we at least get that aspect right. Barely legal (of the type where the actors are made to look like children) is a disgraceful indictment of a society who's focus is on pleasure through entertainment. Same with the fact that we are showing kids porn.
Click to expand...
So the main effect is to make people such as yourself feel better. You're not really bothered if such a ban significantly reduces harm in the real world.

Would you also ban non-graphic depictions of sex you find distasteful?
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
So the main effect is to make people such as yourself feel better. You're not really bothered if such a ban significantly reduces harm in the real world.

Would you also ban non-graphic depictions of sex you find distasteful?
Click to expand...
The main effect would be for the benefit of society as a whole. I don't imagine there are many here who would disagree with Nelson Mandela on this issue. Showing porn to kids should be a wake up call. Allowing barely legal the same.

The 'would you also ban' has been done to death. There will be grey areas.
 
Poem said:
The main effect would be for the benefit of society as a whole.
Click to expand...
What benefit(s) compared to the benefits of other interventions the resources to implement and police the ban could be used on? It is easy for us to sit in our armchairs and say time and resources should be spent doing X and not think about Y or Z. But would spending time and resources on Y or Z be better? Have you even thought about the opportunity cost of banning some or all porn?
Poem said:
I don't imagine there are many here who would disagree with Nelson Mandela on this issue. Showing porn to kids should be a wake up call. Allowing barely legal the same.

The 'would you also ban' has been done to death. There will be grey areas.
Click to expand...
So what you're saying is that some textual descriptions of sex will be banned and others will not. That sounds like a very slippery slope to traverse.
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
What benefit(s) compared to the benefits of other interventions the resources to implement and police the ban could be used on? It is easy for us to sit in our armchairs and say time and resources should be spent doing X and not think about Y or Z. But would spending time and resources on Y or Z be better? Have you even thought about the opportunity cost of banning some or all porn?
Click to expand...
Sorry, but for me, allowing and facilitating the showing of porn to kids is societal depravity on an unprecedented scale. We ban porn at the very least until it can be shown that children are safe from it.
Ivor the Engineer said:
So what you're saying is that some textual descriptions of sex will be banned and others will not. That sounds like a very slippery slope to traverse.
Click to expand...
And on this forum you have acknowledge the de facto slippery slope we are on at the other end of the scale. You have talked about the algorithm that encourages extreme content.

I'll go with issues at the other end. I mean, after all, nobody, by banning porn, is banning sexual pleasure are they?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom