Moderated What's wrong with porn?

[amb]

In most cases rape is not because some idiot can't control himself, but it's a power thing. To have control over another person. To actually have the power to kill or torture their victim. To such psychopaths porn is the last thing on their sick minds.

 

[Belz...]

Did Southwind just say that he can't resist his sexual urges ? Or did I misunderstand him ?

 

[quadraginta]

Did Southwind just say that he can't resist his sexual urges ? Or did I misunderstand him ?

I have a premonition ...

 

[Southwind17]

As I wrote above, I have rest my case, but if you guys want to carry on without me I feel compelled to clarify one point: When I write "you" I mean "you", as in the person I am addressing. When I mean "one", as in a single unspecified person (e.g. one could debate porn, if one was so inclined) I tend to write "one". My use of "you" in Post #2205 most certainly follows this form as I was addressing JFrankA personally and in his Post #2203 he effectively admitted to jacking off at work (and other "inappropriate" places, it seems!). My response to him in Post #2205, now that I've clarified my use of "you" and "one", should leave no doubt as to my views regarding jacking off at work (and other inappropriate places), for those of you who might be wondering.

 

[JFrankA]

As I wrote above, I have rest my case, but if you guys want to carry on without me I feel compelled to clarify one point: When I write "you" I mean "you", as in the person I am addressing. When I mean "one", as in a single unspecified person (e.g. one could debate porn, if one was so inclined) I tend to write "one". My use of "you" in Post #2205 most certainly follows this form as I was addressing JFrankA personally and in his Post #2203 he effectively admitted to jacking off at work (and other "inappropriate" places, it seems!).

Maybe it was a miscommunication on my part and a misunderstanding on yours.

When I said "deal with it" I did not mean masturbation. I meant simply not doing anything about it and just deal with the fact that you are aroused.

Let me rephrase my question to you, and yes, when I said you I WAS addressing you, so that you understand what exactly I was saying:

Aren't there times when you are aroused and you decide to not think about it, not masturbate, not rape, not have sex, not ever try to do anything about being aroused because you are at work or something? You mean to say that the moment you get hard or a woman gets wet we all lose control? Really? If that were true then why don't more women just start having sex indiscriminately throughout the day with just anyone?

That's what I meant. Sheesh. I hope everyone else understood what I was saying.


ETA: You shouldn't rest your case, especially based on a misunderstanding.

 

[Southwind17]

Maybe it was a miscommunication on my part and a misunderstanding on yours.
When I said "deal with it" I did not mean masturbation. I meant simply not doing anything about it and just deal with the fact that you are aroused.

Fine - I can see how we got to cross purposes now, but it doesn't alter my view. Of course most people are capable of controlling their sexual arousal when they need to. Hell, if we didn't we'd all be in jail together (there's a thought! ), but what I'm claiming is that it's not always a simple case of "deciding" not to act on it. You believe that Bill Clinton "decided" to do what he did, and I'm not claiming that somebody held a gun to his head, but come on, he threw caution to the wind big time, which means he either lost his senses completely or he cooly and rationally decided that it was worth the risk. EITHER WAY, it's completely irrational behaviour given what was at stake, and if somebody the likes of Bill Clinton can allow sexual arousal to cause him to lose his senses or affect his judgement to that extent I have absolutely no doubt whatsover that a million low-life child molesters can too, with a much weaker prompt and far less (seemingly!) at stake.

 

[JFrankA]

Fine - I can see how we got to cross purposes now, but it doesn't alter my view. Of course most people are capable of controlling their sexual arousal when they need to.

That's also known as making a choice.

Hell, if we didn't we'd all be in jail together (there's a thought! ),

I get top bunk!!!!!!

but what I'm claiming is that it's not always a simple case of "deciding" not to act on it. You believe that Bill Clinton "decided" to do what he did, and I'm not claiming that somebody held a gun to his head, but come on, he threw caution to the wind big time, which means he either lost his senses completely or he cooly and rationally decided that it was worth the risk. EITHER WAY,

Either way, that's a choice. It's a choice to say "aww the hell with it, let's live for the moment, or if he rationally decided, that's also a choice.

Both are choices, I don't see how they are not.

it's completely irrational behaviour given what was at stake, and if somebody the likes of Bill Clinton can allow sexual arousal to cause him to lose his senses or affect his judgement

Affect his judgment is another way of saying affecting his choice......

to that extent I have absolutely no doubt whatsover that a million low-life child molesters can too, with a much weaker prompt and far less (seemingly!) at stake.

Yeah, they make a choice as to act upon their inappropriate behavior or try to deal with it so it doesn't harm any children.

Again, you've made no proof in your statement "YOU CAN'T HELP YOURSELF, which is exactly the point, YOU CAN'T HELP ACTING ON SEXUAL IMPULSE." In fact your own words in this post say otherwise.

 

[Belz...]

As I wrote above, I have rest my case, but if you guys want to carry on without me I feel compelled to clarify one point: When I write "you" I mean "you", as in the person I am addressing. When I mean "one", as in a single unspecified person (e.g. one could debate porn, if one was so inclined) I tend to write "one". My use of "you" in Post #2205 most certainly follows this form as I was addressing JFrankA personally and in his Post #2203 he effectively admitted to jacking off at work (and other "inappropriate" places, it seems!). My response to him in Post #2205, now that I've clarified my use of "you" and "one", should leave no doubt as to my views regarding jacking off at work (and other inappropriate places), for those of you who might be wondering.

Gotcha.

 

[Matthew Best]

It's entirely inappropriate, BUT YOU CAN'T HELP YOURSELF, which is exactly the point, YOU CAN'T HELP ACTING ON SEXUAL IMPULSE.

Utter codswallop.

 

[RandFan]

As I wrote above, I have rest my case...

• Children are statistically likely to be harmed by VCP (there is a perceived threat).
• VCP is disgusting and no one should defend it.
• Our concern for children should be greater than any concern of loss of freedom for perverts.

It's not much of a case but ok.

 

[Southwind17]

That's also known as making a choice.
Either way, that's a choice. It's a choice to say "aww the hell with it, let's live for the moment, or if he rationally decided, that's also a choice.
Both are choices, I don't see how they are not.
Affect his judgment is another way of saying affecting his choice......
Yeah, they make a choice as to act upon their inappropriate behavior or try to deal with it so it doesn't harm any children.
Again, you've made no proof in your statement "YOU CAN'T HELP YOURSELF, which is exactly the point, YOU CAN'T HELP ACTING ON SEXUAL IMPULSE." In fact your own words in this post say otherwise.

OK - have it your way then. High ranking politicians make "choices" about how to behave when sexually aroused, and sometimes those "choices" suck - big time. You're not seriously suggesting that child molesters make "choices" about how to behave when sexually aroused, and those "choices" never suck - big time, are you?!

 

[Southwind17]

It's not much of a case but ok.

Notwithstanding that that's not my case, it's better than your case: "I'm entirely happy that children are being molested so long as Manga readers are happy too. Me and Manga readers - that's all that matters." Despicable.

 

[RandFan]

Notwithstanding that that's not my case, it's better than your case: "I'm entirely happy that children are being molested so long as Manga readers are happy too. Me and Manga readers - that's all that matters." Despicable.

• You have repeatedly refused to dispute the premises.
• You have repeatedly failed to provide any evidence that children are being harmed.
• I would not be happy if children were harmed. You know that and it is dishonest of you to say otherwise.
• I know that you would not be happy if a child molester were to avoid prosecution because of police misconduct. I also know that you would agree that the interest of justice would be to throw out the evidence in the face of such misconduct. That is how I feel about VCP.

 

[RandFan]

Notwithstanding that that's not my case, it's better than your case: "I'm entirely happy that children are being molested so long as Manga readers are happy too. Despicable.

It should be noted that this is also a big part of your case. Ad hominem poisioning the well. And THAT really is despicable.

 

[MontagK505]

Maybe it was a miscommunication on my part and a misunderstanding on yours.

When I said "deal with it" I did not mean masturbation. I meant simply not doing anything about it and just deal with the fact that you are aroused.

Let me rephrase my question to you, and yes, when I said you I WAS addressing you, so that you understand what exactly I was saying:



That's what I meant. Sheesh. I hope everyone else understood what I was saying.
ETA: You shouldn't rest your case, especially based on a misunderstanding.

I would guess everyone else understood what you meant.

I suspect SW's "misunderstanding" was itentional. It seems to be his style.

 

[Southwind17]

It should be noted that this is also a big part of your case. Ad hominem poisioning the well. And THAT really is despicable.

You really should check your whiny, pathetic comebacks. You're starting to sound like a spotty teenager who's been told he must be home by 9. Try to respond like a responsible adult, as tough as that might be for you.

 

[Southwind17]

I would guess everyone else understood what you meant.

I would "guess" you're right, but I strongly suspect you're wrong!

 

[MontagK505]

Notwithstanding that that's not my case, it's better than your case: "I'm entirely happy that children are being molested so long as Manga readers are happy too. Me and Manga readers - that's all that matters." Despicable.

BIG BS no one has said this. This crap is your brain talking to itself.

 

[RandFan]

You really should check your whiny, pathetic comebacks. You're starting to sound like a spotty teenager who's been told he must be home by 9. Try to respond like a responsible adult, as tough as that might be for you.

• You lie and based on that lie you call me despicable.
• I point out that you are engaging in ad hominem poisoning the well.
• You then proceed to whine and engage in personal attack and accuse me of being childish.
• You need to look in a mirror sometime.

 

[Southwind17]

You have repeatedly refused to dispute the premises.

Dispute what "premises"?

You have repeatedly failed to provide any evidence that children are being harmed.

Tell me - how can one "repeatedly" fail at something that one does not "repeatedly" try? I've openly admitted that there's no scientific or empirical evidence. Such evidence is not the basis of my argument, just like it's not the basis of your "thin end of the wedge" fear!

I would not be happy if children were harmed. You know that and it is dishonest of you to say otherwise.

You seem perfectly happy to discount the possibility in favour of the thin end of principle!

I know that you would not be happy if a child molester were to avoid prosecution because of police misconduct. I also know that you would agree that the interest of justice would be to throw out the evidence in the face of such misconduct. That is how I feel about VCP.