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

[catsmate]

That's a tough one, if you want to make children wary of those things, shouldn't they be told what to be wary of? I always found "don't talk to strangers" a bit too vague and broad to be of actual use.

Given that most sexual abuse occurs within family, church or school, why not teach them warning signs of abusers?

 

[Poem]

Oh good grief, this is just stupid.

it really is catsmate.

 

[Poem]

And for a sufficiently broad interpretation of "showing" you are probably right about the last part

There you go.

 

[catsmate]

The spamming was to kids.

Evidence?

 

[theprestige]

Anything but addressing the substance of my posts. You wrote what you wrote and haven't retracted it - what is the problem?

You tell me what the problem is. You're the one who thinks there's a problem.

 

[Dutchman]

There you go.

I did say "sufficiently broad", where showing means that it exists, and if you know what to look for, you can find it

 

[Poem]

I did say "sufficiently broad", where showing means that it exists, and if you know what to look for, you can find it

and kids can stumble...like kids being curious and sometimes innocent with it...

they are being spammed.

 

[Poem]

You tell me what the problem is. You're the one who thinks there's a problem.

no problem...you said what you said - all good

 

[Poem]

Evidence?

CP?

 

[arthwollipot]

Also, I think it can be safely assumed that if porn were banned, it would still be available, although illegal. People being what they are.

Like abortion. You can't ban abortion, you can only ban safe abortion.

You can only ban safe, consensual porn. No matter how much you happen not to like it, if you ban it, it will get worse.

Porn users have a vested interest in believing their performers are participating without some form of pressure.

There is a lot of safe, consensual porn out there. A lot of people enjoy making it, and it is also quite popular with consumers.

That wasn't the question. The porn user is assured of no pressure - yes or no?

If they aren't getting it from illegal dark web sites, yes, they pretty much are.

Are you now pivoting away from your "porn is simulated-CSAM" argument to the "porn is non-consensual" argument?

As you wish but an argumentum ad populum remains a logical fallacy.

It does, but the argumentum ad populum takes the form "It's good because it's popular" and nobody has been saying that.

and kids can stumble...like kids being curious and sometimes innocent with it...

they are being spammed.

I see we're also pivoting back to the "kids can't avoid it" argument. When was the last time you accidentally stumbled upon porn?

 

[sackett]

Arth, you're not being fair. Poem has never stumbled upon porn any other way than accidentally.

Okay, maybe except for one time at band camp, but she didnt inhale!

 

[Poem]

I did say "sufficiently broad", where showing means that it exists, and if you know what to look for, you can find it

Whichever - that we (adult humanity) has allowed this to happen to children and that it is proof of our moral bankruptcy is without doubt.

 

[catsmate]

CP?

Sweet Jeebus, but you are pathetically unable to do simple research, or answer the points made.

 

[catsmate]

it really is catsmate.

You inability to understand what a logical fallacy actually is? I agree.

 

[Poem]

Sweet Jeebus, but you are pathetically unable to do simple research, or answer the points made.

What does CP mean?

 

[catsmate]

What does CP mean?

Still no research skills? That rather undermines your assertions....

 

[Poem]

Still no research skills? That rather undermines your assertions....

Did the research. You don't know what it means do you?

 

[Poem]

Porn as alternative for sex sounds er... mainstream enough, but sex as alternative for porn? Not so much, to me at least. A bit weird, even.

So, in the context you used (ie as an alternative), porn is normal and generally acceptable, but real sex is odd and peculiar?

 

[Poem]

If the law and/or its enforcement are not as they should be, the people have means to change them, through their representatives. It's called democracy. And if the majority thinks they are fine as they are then that's the way it stays. Terms like "morally bankrupt" all sound fine and upstanding, but have no legal meaning.

Remains an argumentum ad populum - that the law is fine (acceptable and satisfactory) as it is because most people think that.

Admit it is a fallacy and we can move on.

 

[Darat]

Remains an argumentum ad populum - that the law is fine (acceptable and satisfactory) as it is because most people think that.

Admit it is a fallacy and we can move on.

Agan it is only a fallacy if it was being used as a logical argument, in this case it isn't it is simply stating how democracy works. Your problem is with reality.