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

[Poem]

How about we start teaching healthy sexual relationships first (which does not mean exclusively heterosexual monogamous relationships sanctified by religion) and let porn take care of itself?

If people understand what a healthy sexual relationship is, and its relation to porn, then the dangers you suggest are lurking just around the corner vanish. As I have been saying all along, education is the silver bullet. Honest, factual, ideology-free, guilt-free education.

You seem to be under the illusion that heterosexual relationships need not be the norm - that biology hasn't actually determined them to be so. So what - are you challenging science now? You do know the existential implications of this don't you?

You are propagating and making excuses for an industry that recklessly spams and influences kid's (and by extension all consumer's) sexuality.

 

[Myriad]

You seem to be under the illusion that heterosexual relationships need not be the norm - that biology hasn't actually determined them to be so. So what - are you challenging science now? You do know the existential implications of this don't you?

You are propagating and making excuses for an industry that recklessly spams and influences kid's (and by extension consumer's) sexuality.

Biology determines that heterosexual reproduction is the norm.

For human beings in the modern world, that's an average of two to three occasions per lifetime. What does biology say we should be doing the rest of the time?

What does biology say about heterosexual relationships? Let's see a comprehensive summary—you can limit it to us vertebrates if you wish, but in that case be sure to include, for instance, salmon, lions, and bonobos.

 

[Poem]

Biology determines that heterosexual reproduction is the norm.

For human beings in the modern world, that's an average of two to three occasions per lifetime. What does biology say we should be doing the rest of the time?

What does biology say about heterosexual relationships? Let's see a comprehensive summary—you can limit it to us vertebrates if you wish, but in that case be sure to include, for instance, salmon, lions, and bonobos.

In order for species survival it must be the case that heterosexual attraction is the norm; you won't have progeny without it. And the efficacy of child-rearing will depend on stable relationships of that sort.

I'm talking about humans in a pornified world - so let's stay on topic.

 

[sackett]

"Humans in a pornified world!" So that's where you're speaking from! Oh, it's so obvious now! Good
on ya, Poem old gal!

And enjoy your blithe fortune. The rest of us live in a world of houses & trees & sky & puppydogs & --
Pretty boring, right?


ETA: Right?

 

[Poem]

"Humans in a pornified world!" So that's where you're speaking from! Oh, it's so obvious now! Good
on ya, Poem old gal!

And enjoy your blithe fortune. The rest of us live in a world of houses & trees & sky & puppydogs & --
Pretty boring, right?


ETA: Right?

Have you been listening to Shostakovich again sackett?

 

[theprestige]

If sex is no more meaningful, valuable or morally challenging than speaking then it is not special. We don't generally need consent to speak. You would not recommend porn or prostitution as a career, but you would not say that about expressing one's thoughts would you? Without an understanding of why you do distinguish speech and porn on the one hand and yet draw a parallel on the other, then it may not be possible to continue with the debate.

I guess it depends what the debate is about.

Do you think porn should be regulated separately from (and more intrusively than) speech because sex is special in a way that other topics of speech are not?

It's a yes or no question, though of course an explanation for the yes or no would be welcome.

Without maintaining the long-held view that sex is special - that it is the very glue that defines relationship stability and the fate of the next generation through their progeny, then - well, you arrive at the broken situation we are in today. Society will remain dysfunctional unless and until we assimilate that obvious truth.

What would you recommend, as steps towards assimilating this truth?

Why won't you explain the (your) issue with sex education and the porn industry spamming kinks to our youth? It is relevant to this discussion.

I thought I have explained it. You seem to think I should be reaching some conclusion, but you won't say what that conclusion is. I've already told you the conclusion I have reached: Sex, including pornography, is a proper subject for free expression, no matter how much I consider sex to be a special thing, and no matter how much I dislike some of the things people have to say, when they exercise their right to free expression on the subject.

This is why I think the SCOTUS ruling was correct. We should not impose blanket bans on discussion of sex, just because the laws meant to impose narrow restrictions were written too carelessly and too broadly.

My speculation is inversely proportional to your unwillingness to outline your position (see last sentence above).

You don't need to speculate at all. You can just take or leave what I've actually said, as-is.

Also, remember, you're trying to change my mind about porn regulation. I need to understand your position; you don't need to understand mine.

Rude games? I responded by assuming POV meant 'privately owned vehicle' and that post remains without a response from you.

That came after a couple days of you playing rude games. By that point, I'd already given up. Also, that particular response didn't have anything interesting to say or respond to anyway.

 

[Myriad]

In order for species survival it must be the case that heterosexual attraction is the norm; you won't have progeny without it. And the efficacy of child-rearing will depend on stable relationships of that sort.

I'm talking about humans in a pornified world - so let's stay on topic.

Now that I understand that your true objection to porn is not child sexual abuse as you've been claiming for page after page, but opposition to the progressive agenda to turn kids gay by allowing them to view gay porn and thus cause the human species to go extinct, I fully support your advocacy of a total ban on all porn.

...is what I'd be saying if I were some kind of delusional homophobic bigot.

Interesting that you'd appeal to "biology" to try to make this vile case, but then declare actual biology, actual knowledge of the unfathomably varied and complex natural world that we're part of, "off topic." Quite the hypocritical little weasel you're representing yourself as here.

 

[Poem]

Now that I understand that your true objection to porn is not child sexual abuse as you've been claiming for page after page, but opposition to the progressive agenda to turn kids gay by allowing them to view gay porn and thus cause the human species to go extinct, I fully support your advocacy of a total ban on all porn.

...is what I'd be saying if I were some kind of delusional homophobic bigot.

A spectacularly unjustified inference.

Interesting that you'd appeal to "biology" to try to make this vile case,

Where is the vile case? I stated biological facts.

but then declare actual biology, actual knowledge of the unfathomably varied and complex natural world that we're part of, "off topic." Quite the hypocritical little weasel you're representing yourself as here.

Shall we stick to the thread subject and not descend into 'to the man' attacks

 

[Poem]

Now that I understand that your true objection to porn is not child sexual abuse as you've been claiming for page after page, but opposition to the progressive agenda to turn kids gay by allowing them to view gay porn and thus cause the human species to go extinct, I fully support your advocacy of a total ban on all porn.

...is what I'd be saying if I were some kind of delusional homophobic bigot.

Interesting that you'd appeal to "biology" to try to make this vile case, but then declare actual biology, actual knowledge of the unfathomably varied and complex natural world that we're part of, "off topic." Quite the hypocritical little weasel you're representing yourself as here.

Make your case as to why I am wrong to say that homosexuality will always be a minority.

 

[Lithrael]

Well. I didn't have 'it'll make us go extinct from lack of reproduction' on my bingo card.

 

[Dutchman]

Well. I didn't have 'it'll make us go extinct from lack of reproduction' on my bingo card.

If we go extinct from lack of reproduction, pornography will automatically vanish. Problem solved.

 

[arthwollipot]

Without maintaining the long-held view that sex is special - that it is the very glue that defines relationship stability and the fate of the next generation through their progeny, then - well, you arrive at the broken situation we are in today. Society will remain dysfunctional unless and until we assimilate that obvious truth.

In what specific ways is society today dysfunctional? For bonus points, please go into detail about how the lack of the view that sex is special led directly to these specific dysfunctions?

My speculation is inversely proportional to your unwillingness to outline your position

Please outline your position, in the specific sense that I say above.

Ok, but I have said it all before.

You've said nothing before, except for ideologically motivated vague and moralistic claims about how porn has destroyed the fabric of society.

I look around me and I see an undestroyed society. Please tell me in exactly what ways society is broken and how porn led directly to that. You have said nothing concrete or testable, despite being prompted many, many times.

You seem to be under the illusion that heterosexual relationships need not be the norm - that biology hasn't actually determined them to be so. So what - are you challenging science now? You do know the existential implications of this don't you?

You are propagating and making excuses for an industry that recklessly spams and influences kid's (and by extension all consumer's) sexuality.

You are questioning the proposition that heterosexual relationships need not be the norm? Such a basic and fundamental aspect of human sexuality as this is practically axiomatic. There is more to human biology than the physical act of reproduction, and a lot more to human sexuality than that.

You accuse us of claiming that sex is not special, and then you reduce it to nothing more than reproduction! No. Sex is far more special than the simple act of breeding. People are not livestock.

 

[Lithrael]

Maybe everyone who is in love in ways that don't directly contribute to the next generation, is wasting all the specialness of love on uh.. loving one another, selfishly (ie without raising genetically related children). And so now there isn't enough special love to go around for the nuclear family types, leaving them doomed to be jerks to one another, endlessly reciting 'ol ball and chain' and 'ugh my kids' 'I know right' lines at the water cooler.

 

[Poem]

You are questioning the proposition that heterosexual relationships need not be the norm? Such a basic and fundamental aspect of human sexuality as this is practically axiomatic.

A Comical Ali moment. Heterosexuality remains the norm...but porn has and will impact on that - particularly among the young whose sexual scripts are still forming.

...........
What did it for you before is boring today. And things you couldn't imagine being interested in when you're younger now are delicious.

There is more to human biology than the physical act of reproduction, and a lot more to human sexuality than that.

Never said otherwise.

You accuse us of claiming that sex is not special, and then you reduce it to nothing more than reproduction! No. Sex is far more special than the simple act of breeding. People are not livestock.

Never did that. Show me where you dreamt I did.

 

[arthwollipot]

Never did that. Show me where you dreamt I did.

Where you said that heterosexual reproduction was the foundation for society and non-heterosexual and/or non-reproductive sex has existential implications.

Heterosexual sex is the "norm" only inasmuch as there are more heterosexual people than non-heterosexual people. Non-heterosexual sex is not "abnormal". It is perfectly natural. Those who practice it are in a minority, but that doesn't mean that the minority are any less "normal" than everyone else.

 

[Poem]

Where you said that heterosexual reproduction was the foundation for society

It is foundational - but I did not use the words 'nothing more than'.

and non-heterosexual and/or non-reproductive sex has existential implications.

Heterosexual sex is the "norm" only inasmuch as there are more heterosexual people than non-heterosexual people.

Correct.

Non-heterosexual sex is not "abnormal".

Never said it was abnormal.

It is perfectly natural.

It is.

Those who practice it are in a minority, but that doesn't mean that the minority are any less "normal" than everyone else.

Indeed...that is my understanding.