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

Poem said:
Incorrect. The Miller Test only needs a little tweaking and the whole US porn edifice could crumble. Nothing unconstitutional about that. Your faith in the Supreme Court is extraordinary.
Click to expand...

Give that a try. Rewrite the Miller Test to your liking, post it here, and then we can examine whether your tweaks do the job without overreaching.
 
Lithrael said:
To the best of a quick search, there are something like 13 million people under the age of 16 living in the UK. Someone is doing a lot of work to get 54 million accesses in four months. If the kids like it THAT much they're definitely gonna be setting up VPNs if the banhammer comes down.
Click to expand...
Apologies - it's 2022 - fixed date and link below:

Barnardo's January 2022:
Since the decision not to enact Part 3 of the Digital Economy Act in October 2019, Barnardo’s have found that it is likely that children will have accessed pornographic content 54 million times at a minimum.
 
Poem said:
It wasn't a mistake. The poster knows what it's about.
Click to expand...

1. Stop being so childishly rude: refer to me by my forum name, please.
2. Yes, I do know what it's about- and I told you why I will no longer by replying to that particular part of this debate. Stop trying to personalise this, and stop trying to bait me into a breach of the MA.
Poem said:
Regarding the UK law - I cited CEOP which is part of the NCA.
Click to expand...

Can you please show where on their website the wording you have been endlessly repeating can be found?
Poem said:
I have repeatedly spoke of the spirit rather than the letter of the law.
Click to expand...
Bollocks you have. You have been hammering at anyone within earshot about these exact words, and demanding yes/no answers as to whether anyone agrees with them. Not an inkling of the "spirit of the law".
I note you still have not cited the actual law. I think by now it's fairly clear that you can't, because that wording is not part of UK law. Your goalpost shift from the letter to the spirit of the law is a clear sign of this.
 
Poem, why do you not think the statue of David should wear a fig leaf, many people see it as an erotic celebration of an idealised male form, is it because it is old, or is there another reason? A teacher of 11 year olds was sacked after she showed a class a picture of David, parents said it was pornographic, surely to be consistent with what you want he either needs a fig leaf to be placed over his genitals or only ever shown to adults after they have verified their age?
 
Ziggurat said:
Why do you think that changes anything I said? It doesn't. That data and those profiles are only useful, and only worth paying for, to the extent that the users can be coaxed into buying things. Which minors generally can't be online. You can drive up the numbers short term, but long term you're just diluting the value.
Click to expand...
Children's Commissioner (May 2023):
Our survey analysis also demonstrated a significant link between an early age of first exposure to pornography and frequency of exposure in later years.

Care.org (5 July 2022):
Children and teens who are exposed to pornography are more likely to become addicted than adults, a study shows.

Research highlighted by the Wall Street Journal found young brains are more susceptible to porn addiction because they release more dopamine, the neurotransmitter associated with pleasurable feelings.
(The same is reported in the New York Post (4 July 2022)).

Family Studies (4 April 2024):
The thing about addiction is that oftentimes, the younger a person is when they are first exposed, the higher their risk for developing a serious addiction that can dominate minds and bodies, numbing them to the environment around them. This reality creates a strong motivation for parents, grandparents, schools, and lawmakers to focus on protecting children by preventing or delaying exposure to harmful substances and behaviours until their brains are more fully formed and their risk for developing dependencies is lessened.


It's not a stretch to suggest the porn companies have a vested interest in hooking people at a young and vulnerable age with the prospect of pay day when they hit 18.
 
Last edited:
Poem said:
It's not a stretch to suggest the porn companies have a vested interest in hooking people at a young and vulnerable age with the prospect of pay day when they hit 18.
Click to expand...

It is when those same porn companies have voluntarily agreed to implement the new, more robust age checks in the UK. Why would they be acting against their own "vested interests" of their own free will?
 
zooterkin said:
You used the phrase 'barely legal' as if it had some relevance, without explanation. "Barely legal" porn is legal porn; the 'barely' is there for titillation. On what grounds do you want to treat it differently from any other legal porn?
Click to expand...
Most of the actors in the "barely" legal category are in their mid-20s or older. They are just small and slim, and can pass for around 18 to porn watchers.
 
Institute of Economic Affairs (02.10.24)
Unless the UK wishes to go follow the path of authoritarian states, where the usage of VPNs and other privacy tools is heavily regulated, there is nothing to stop adolescents using easily available software to circumvent online age verification measures.
 
Gotta envy those authoritarian states and the lucky people who get to live in them!
 
Poem said:
Institute of Economic Affairs (02.10.24)
Unless the UK wishes to go follow the path of authoritarian states, where the usage of VPNs and other privacy tools is heavily regulated, there is nothing to stop adolescents using easily available software to circumvent online age verification measures.
Click to expand...
Yes, we should model our decisions on the nonsensical witterings of the Randbots at the IEA. Following the unquestioning disciples of a woman who got every major philosophical, political and economic idea she had in her life wrong will not lead us astray!
 
....................................................
 
Last edited:
Gulliver Foyle said:
Yes, we should model our decisions on the nonsensical witterings of the Randbots at the IEA. Following the unquestioning disciples of a woman who got every major philosophical, political and economic idea she had in her life wrong will not lead us astray!
Click to expand...
What about the article is incorrect would you say?
 
Poem said:
Anyone here comfortable with defending the type of porn featured in Benjamin Nolot's 'Barely Legal' documentary?
Click to expand...
I might be, but I haven't seen the documentary, and currently have no plans to put it on my "to be watched" list.

But we can still make a first approximation of my comfort level in potentially defending such porn: Does the documentary demonstrate that any of the featured porn was made illegally?
 
Poem said:
Institute of Economic Affairs (02.10.24)
Unless the UK wishes to go follow the path of authoritarian states, where the usage of VPNs and other privacy tools is heavily regulated, there is nothing to stop adolescents using easily available software to circumvent online age verification measures.
Click to expand...

While most people would probably agree that individuals should be free to consume adult entertainment even if others find it morally objectionable, few would argue that children should have access to such material.
Click to expand...

Poem, do you agree with this?
 
The film's director, Benjamin Nolot, says that such pornographers are 'promoting the fantasy of sex with a child'. Is he wrong?

I posted a link to the film six days ago and there still has not been any response.
 
Last edited:
Poem said:
The film's director, Benjamin Nolot says that such pornographers are 'promoting the fantasy of sex with a child'. Is he wrong?
Click to expand...
Probably. One could argue that 18 year olds aren't yet emotionally and intellectually mature enough to handle a physically intimate and highly charged relationship. But I bet you and Ben are both trying to equivocate between sexually mature young adults and prepubescent children.
Poem said:
I posted a link to the film six days ago and there still has not been any response.
Click to expand...
You were wrong even before I replied to this post.
 
theprestige said:
Probably. One could argue that 18 year olds aren't yet emotionally and intellectually mature enough to handle a physically intimate and highly charged relationship. But I bet you and Ben are both trying to equivocate between sexually mature young adults and prepubescent children.
Click to expand...
Have you watched the film?
theprestige said:
You were wrong even before I replied to this post.
Click to expand...
What has that got to do with what I said? Wrong about what?
 
I find I strange that Poem is fine with kids seeing penises when they seem to have said before that such exposure is illegal in the UK.
 
theprestige said:
But we can still make a first approximation of my comfort level in potentially defending such porn: Does the documentary demonstrate that any of the featured porn was made illegally?
Click to expand...

Poem: you arer demanding a response to this film you've posted, so have the courtesy to answer when you do actually get a response. Do you have an answer to this question?
 
Metro.co.uk (2015 updated in 11 Dec. 2019) cites Pornhub's own data showing the most searched for term among men was 'teen'.

Exodus Cry (Benjamin Nolot) has an article by Madison McQueen (17 August 2022) on the subject of barely legal porn:
"the U.S. is only one of 15 countries which allows child-themed or teen-themed pornography."

Though I have not been able to verify the latter, it appears that countries that do proscribe such content are powerless to act against it when it's internet based. Why this is so remains unclear.
 
Poem said:
Metro.co.uk (2015 updated in 11 Dec. 2019) cites Pornhub's own data showing the most searched for term among men was 'teen'.

Exodus Cry (Benjamin Nolot) has an article by Madison McQueen (17 August 2022) on the subject of barely legal porn:
"the U.S. is only one of 15 countries which allows child-themed or teen-themed pornography."

Though I have not been able to verify the latter, it appears that countries that do proscribe such content are powerless to act against it when it's internet based. Why this is so remains unclear.
Click to expand...
Cosmic Yak said:
Poem: you arer demanding a response to this film you've posted, so have the courtesy to answer when you do actually get a response. Do you have an answer to this question?
Click to expand...

Your post does not appear to contain an answer to this question.
 
Cosmic Yak said:
Your post does not appear to contain an answer to this question.
Click to expand...
As far as I am aware - all the barely legal porn featured in the Nolot documentary is produced in the USA where it is not illegal to do so.
 
Poem said:
As far as I am aware - all the barely legal porn featured in the Nolot documentary is produced in the USA where it is not illegal to do so.
Click to expand...
Legal adults consensually portraying legal adults engaged in legal activities, using legal production methods, seems like a a sufficient defense in itself.

Is there something about it you'd like to attack?
 
theprestige said:
Legal adults consensually portraying legal adults engaged in legal activities, using legal production methods, seems like a a sufficient defense in itself.

Is there something about it you'd like to attack?
Click to expand...
Some pornographers don't scruple to portray them as underage, so I am puzzled by your assertion to the contrary. If we assume that director Nolot is correct in stating that such depictions are illegal in most countries (his website asserts only 15 countries allow it), then it's statistically going to be the case that consuming it is going to be illegal (unless, of course, the countries that do allow it are all the high population ones).

The questing remains: how is this industry getting away with it?
 
arthwollipot said:
If you take a look at PornHub, you will find that the "Teen" category is actually called "Teen 18+".
Click to expand...
Given their poor moderation history, why do you trust that? Kristof established that their content was infested with 'rape videos' in 2020 and, AFAIK, the same VPs and executives are still there. As recently as 2023, PH was exposed by undercover work by
Sound Investigations.
 
Last edited:
Poem said:
Some pornographers don't scruple to portray them as underage, so I am puzzled by your assertion to the contrary. If we assume that director Nolot is correct in stating that such depictions are illegal in most countries (his website asserts only 15 countries allow it), then it's statistically going to be the case that consuming it is going to be illegal (unless, of course, the countries that do allow it are all the high population ones).

The questing remains: how is this industry getting away with it?
Click to expand...
Are you aware that in most media the "teenagers" are often played by older adults? In the UK it is legal for an 18 year old to act in pornography. It is also legal for under 18 year olds to view pornography.
 
Poem said:
Given their poor moderation history, why do you trust that? Kristof established that their content was infested with 'rape videos' in 2020 and, AFAIK, the same VPs and executives are still there. As recently as 2023, PH was exposed by undercover work by
Sound Investigations.
Click to expand...
As you know I went to look at Pornhub when you were making your clam of what constituted 90% of porn when you went to the site. That claim was disproven in a few minutes if research. Those that make such claims have a burden of proof to show their research.
 
Poem said:
Some pornographers don't scruple to portray them as underage, so I am puzzled by your assertion to the contrary. If we assume that director Nolot is correct in stating that such depictions are illegal in most countries (his website asserts only 15 countries allow it), then it's statistically going to be the case that consuming it is going to be illegal (unless, of course, the countries that do allow it are all the high population ones).

The questing remains: how is this industry getting away with it?
Click to expand...
Given you're the one who's claiming there's a problem, perhaps you should take the time to do a bit of research and quantify some of those assumptions. Just for starters, what ages are you actually talking about (both being portrayed and of the performers), which countries, and what is the population of those countries?
 
Darat said:
As you know I went to look at Pornhub when you were making your clam of what constituted 90% of porn when you went to the site. That claim was disproven in a few minutes if research. Those that make such claims have a burden of proof to show their research.
Click to expand...
The 90% claim was about violence in porn which I conceded was not substantiated. That such a claim is not tenable isn't conceding a lot...though, of course, it reflected poorly on me.

The Journal of Criminology published research by Grey et al in 2021:
Sexual violence as a sexual script in mainstream online pornography

We found that one in eight titles shown to first-time users on the first page of mainstream porn sites describe sexual activity that constitutes sexual violence.

The true percentage of porn videos that show violence will always be difficult to ascertain. The prevalence and normalization of strangling/choking during sex would seem to bear out a percentage that is significant.
 
Darat said:
Are you aware that in most media the "teenagers" are often played by older adults? In the UK it is legal for an 18 year old to act in pornography. It is also legal for under 18 year olds to view pornography.
Click to expand...
The significant factor, though, is that legal porn actors portraying a child is illegal in the UK. Such material on DVD, Blu-ray or Video on demand is banned.

Canada also has made such content illegal (indeed Nolot claims most countries have). Yet, one can just turn on the computer and watch away...
 
zooterkin said:
Given you're the one who's claiming there's a problem, perhaps you should take the time to do a bit of research and quantify some of those assumptions. Just for starters, what ages are you actually talking about (both being portrayed and of the performers), which countries, and what is the population of those countries?
Click to expand...
I have been attempting to find out which countries.

Have you watched the film? All the actors are (as far as we know) 18+ - but some look about 14 or even younger.
 
Poem said:
The significant factor, though, is that legal porn actors portraying a child is illegal in the UK. Such material on DVD, Blu-ray or Video on demand is banned.

Canada also has made such content illegal (indeed Nolot claims most countries have). Yet, one can just turn on the computer and watch away...
Click to expand...
But teens includes 18 and 19 year olds, and such portrayals are not illegal. That "teen" is searched for does not mean that the porn returned is illegal.
 
Darat said:
But teens includes 18 and 19 year olds, and such portrayals are not illegal. That "teen" is searched for does not mean that the porn returned is illegal.
Click to expand...
Are you stating that depictions such as those featured in the Nolot documentary are not found on tube sites?

I will repost this from Barnardo's (Dec 2022):
Pornographic content which suggests sexual activity with children is extremely harmful but is rife on mainstream pornography sites. This content promotes an interest in child sexual abuse material and in some cases can lead to abuse online and offline. Such content would be illegal offline, on DVD or Blu Ray, but is prevalent across mainstream pornography sites.
Online pornography platforms host videos depicting sexual activity with actors or characters who look like children: petite, young-looking performers made to look underage through props such as stuffed toys, lollipops and school uniforms and sexual activity between family members, particularly step-families. Although not strictly illegal, this is extremely harmful, sexualising children and driving the demand for ‘real’ child sexual abuse material.

Here's Canada's stance on such material:
...material of any kind that depicts a person who is or is depicted as being under the age of eighteen years and engaged in or depicted as engaged in explicit sexual activity, or the dominant characteristic of which is the depiction, for a sexual purpose, of a sexual organ or the anal region of a person under the age of eighteen years, is unlawful
 
Poem said:
Given their poor moderation history, why do you trust that? Kristof established that their content was infested with 'rape videos' in 2020 and, AFAIK, the same VPs and executives are still there. As recently as 2023, PH was exposed by undercover work by
Sound Investigations.
Click to expand...
You may not be aware that PornHub (and other porn aggregators) have significantly tightened their standards because of exactly those investigations. It was only after 2020, for example, that the "Teen" category was renamed to "Teen 18+", which may seem only cosmetic, but it is significant.
 
Poem said:
Are you stating that depictions such as those featured in the Nolot documentary are not found on tube sites?
Click to expand...
Without going into details, I've never happened across any*. Virtually none of the performers that I see look even remotely like they're not at least in their mid-20s.

I had to hastily reword that sentence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom