I had realised (after I posted) that the rates might be different when looking at reported crime versus all crime, but I wrongly assumed that the difference couldn't be that large. I was very pleasantly surprised to see that survey that showed a 70% decrease in rape. It just shows you how the media can lead you to believe that everything is always getting worse, so that you can't quite believe it when something like this gets so much better.
Porn may cause in the viewer the impression that extreme acts are more common than they really are. Anal and facials, for example, are not as common in your normal sex life as they are on any porn site.
I had realised (after I posted) that the rates might be different when looking at reported crime versus all crime, but I wrongly assumed that the difference couldn't be that large. I was very pleasantly surprised to see that survey that showed a 70% decrease in rape. It just shows you how the media can lead you to believe that everything is always getting worse, so that you can't quite believe it when something like this gets so much better.
I agree that it is hard to believe. In just a decade? And obviously porn availability doesn't explain most of that difference (if the data can be believed. But I guess if the methodology has been the same since 93 we have to believe it right? Even if there is some bias, it would be the same bias as long as they keep using the same methodology, right?).
Possible factors other than porn:
Roe v. Wade (Donohue Levitt)
High rates of incarceration
Good economy (esp. low unemployment rates)
Demographics (aging: fewer young males)
Improved morality
What else could there be?
Yes, the latest theory is lead in the gasoline, or lack thereof.
In the mid '70's, the US banned lead in gasoline. Lead poisoning makes you stupider, which increases your tendency to violence and crime. 18 years later (same argument as for Roe v. Wade) crime starts dropping.
The promoters of this theory at least make a prediction, that crime in England/Europe should start dropping similarly 18 years or so after they banned lead from gasoline, which was somewhat later. I forget if this period is starting or not, yet.
Would we rather eliminate the proclivity altogether, or control it with virtual reality? If we find we can't eliminate it, is settling for a harmless outlet acceptable, in general?
You don't stop searching for a cure for diabetes just because it can be controlled with insulin. Why should you stop searching for a cure for violent sexual proclivities just because they can be controlled with porn?
Assuming they can be controlled with porn, which hasn't actually been established here.
You don't stop searching for a cure for diabetes just because it can be controlled with insulin. Why should you stop searching for a cure for violent sexual proclivities just because they can be controlled with porn?
Can any sexual proclivities be cured? To flow with your analogy, what if research eventually establishes that diabetes can sometimes be prevented, and often controlled, but can't be cured? What if the same is true about sexual proclivities?
What if things like these can be cured, but not for many years, until we develop the technology or techniques that allow for cure? What could we do in the meantime?
If there is a solid link between access to porn/porn viewing, and a reduction in sexual crimes, would it mean we ought to revisit obscenity laws?
Assuming they can be controlled with porn, which hasn't actually been established here.
No, it hasn't, which is why I began my musing with a vague idea of doing research to confirm or refute that, if possible. But then, I no longer necessarily trust "studies" and statistics the way I used to....
Well, there are those who'll tell you homosexuality can be "cured" by the power of Jesus...
I suppose you could cure someone of a fondness for rape with aversion therapy, a la A Clockwork Orange. All kinds of problems with that, I would imagine.
To flow with your analogy, what if research eventually establishes that diabetes can sometimes be prevented, and often controlled, but can't be cured? What if the same is true about sexual proclivities?
Polio can't be cured (at least if last week's episode of House, M.D. is to be believed), but it can be prevented, which is why we vaccinate children. If an anti-rape vaccine could be invented, why shouldn't it be used?
If there is a solid link between access to porn/porn viewing, and a reduction in sexual crimes, would it mean we ought to revisit obscenity laws?
No, it hasn't, which is why I began my musing with a vague idea of doing research to confirm or refute that, if possible. But then, I no longer necessarily trust "studies" and statistics the way I used to....
Several studies find no link between rape and porn.
Here's one - an interesting and informing read even:
PORNOGRAPHY, SEX CRIME, AND PUBLIC POLICY
Berl Kutchinsky
Professor of Criminology
Institute of Criminology and Criminal Science
University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Since this is my first post, I'm not allowed to post the URL but a google search for "Berl Kutchinksky type:_pdf" (ignore the underscore) will land you the study.
An interesting side note: it's from the university of Copenhagen. As probably all of you know, Denmark was first to legalise pornography.
Sorry, asking the rapists what? If viewing porn reduces the urge to rape, or similar questions? I should think that if one is going to study this, one has to "ask the rapists," doesn't one? Or does one assume their answers for them?
Not sure what you're saying, or why you're saying it to me. I don't plan to study the question. I've been sexually assaulted, multiple times. Why, exactly, would I want a rapist to open his heart to me? You make no sense and I find the comment vaguely insulting.
Honey, there are those who will tell you they saw Bigfoot get abducted by aliens, and he was still dangling the anal probe when he returned and ran off into the woods. So?
I like this version, wherein South Park is merged with Harry Potter:
Sorry. It just makes me grin.
I suppose you could cure someone of a fondness for rape with aversion therapy, a la A Clockwork Orange. All kinds of problems with that, I would imagine.
Polio can't be cured (at least if last week's episode of House, M.D. is to be believed), but it can be prevented, which is why we vaccinate children. If an anti-rape vaccine could be invented, why shouldn't it be used?
I would like to have first heard your reasons, pro and con, for such a vaccine, but I guess it won't hurt to give you mine. Off the top of my head, and not having considered this fully....well, it sounds okay at first blush, which makes me immediately distrust that it is.
First, I'm going to take "vaccine" to mean "cure," in some form or fashion. I think the form and fashion would matter--there are some things I'm not willing to do to a person to stop a behavior. I mean, if the only way to stop a mad dog is to shoot him, then shoot him. But make sure that's the only way, if you're dealing with people, before you pull the trigger. He or she may be a sick person, but still a person, and entitled to basic human rights.
No, I do not want to give my definitions of those. Assume.
If the only way to stop such behavior results in diminished mental capacity, for instance, I wouldn't approve. I wouldn't want to damage someone's brain in the name of "fixing" it.
I also think discussing this point much further will take me farther afield of my original point, so I'm going to shelve it for now. Bring it up again later, if there are points you want to make or clairfy, by all means. Let's just say that if the cure results in harm, I'm generally not in favor if it. It would really depend.
Dunno. What are the obscenity laws? Is it against the law to look at porn in the privacy of your own home, provided minors aren't involved?
This was what I'm interested in exploring. I've been thinking about recent discussions about virtual porn, specifically virtual kiddie porn. Perhaps obviously, I am wholeheartedly against children being used sexually. I find it revolting and abnormal behavior that causes lifelong harm to its victims, and if I cared, to its perpetrators, as well.
But if allowing these slime to do what they do to computer generated images reduces the likelihood of them doing it to real kids, then I'd consider allowing the legal (yet perhaps somehow restricted) creation of virtual kiddie porn. It's something I'd want studied very carefully, however, with all conceivable ramifications explored. I'd be horrified if it turned out viewing virtual porn just increases actual incidents, or makes the idea seem so commonplace that societal standards somehow slip and it gradually becomes more acceptable to actually do...
The first step is in these studies or observations that seem to show viewing a virtual substitute reduces incidents of the actual behavior. I think that's a concept worth exploring further.
According to economic theory, if one thing is a substitute for another (even if not a perfect substitute), and the cost/benefit ratio of one of those things decreases (the cost goes down and/or the benefit goes up) then people will start consuming more of that thing and less of the other. Heck, I'm married and I probably spend more time viewing porn than having sex with my wife. Often, she is not available for one reason or another, so I find a substitute.
In the case of crimes, of course, the "cost" is not a cash cost, but a risk cost and maybe a psychological cost (depending on whether the criminal has a conscience and how developed that conscience is).
In answer to your question, I think the pragmatic course is to accept that human beings are what they are, and it is not possible to "perfect" them. So you figure out how to let them do what they need to do in a way that doesn't cause harm to others, or at least causes less harm. A utilitarian approach.
So... if porn is a "substitute" in the classic economic sense. Can anyone answer if there is an overall reduction in other sex related numbers
Number of partners?
Number of times per time period people engage in sex?
Reduction in STDs?
Reduction in infidelity?
Along those lines... has anyone done a study that tracks sex crimes and general practices? Are any of these thing correlated?
Also if sex crimes and general practices are correlated... did the AIDS epidemic have an impact on these things before the explosion of internet porn.
Finally, do any of the rape studies control for socio-economic status. If internet porn is causal in some way, I would think that there should be less effect among the poor who might not have as much access to internet/video porn as the technically sophisticated denizens of the JREF forum.
So... if porn is a "substitute" in the classic economic sense. Can anyone answer if there is an overall reduction in other sex related numbers
Number of partners?
Number of times per time period people engage in sex?
Reduction in STDs?
Reduction in infidelity?
Along those lines... has anyone done a study that tracks sex crimes and general practices? Are any of these thing correlated?
Also if sex crimes and general practices are correlated... did the AIDS epidemic have an impact on these things before the explosion of internet porn.
Finally, do any of the rape studies control for socio-economic status. If internet porn is causal in some way, I would think that there should be less effect among the poor who might not have as much access to internet/video porn as the technically sophisticated denizens of the JREF forum.
No, asking them simply what prompted them to rape (assuming they're honest, and yes, that's a big assumption, but I'm sure many rapists have little incentive to lie in the context of a scientific study).
I'm saying it to you because you're an active participant in this thread, which infers you have an interest in what's being written, and you claim to have little trust in 'studies' and statistics. I previously implied the same, and suggested that simply asking rapists what prompted them to rape might be a more reliable method of seeking a correlation between porn and rape.
I've been sexually assaulted, multiple times. Why, exactly, would I want a rapist to open his heart to me? You make no sense and I find the comment vaguely insulting.
I'm sorry to learn that, and I'm sorry that you find my choice of a figure of speach vaguely insulting. I'm not suggesting that you should be the one to undertake the research.
No, asking them simply what prompted them to rape (assuming they're honest, and yes, that's a big assumption, but I'm sure many rapists have little incentive to lie in the context of a scientific study).
Do you have any reason to think that this will give us reliable data? "They have no reason I know of to lie" is not much of a reason - the same logic is applied to people who claim to have been abducted by aliens.
They could say it was porn, or the Devil, or violence on television, or Dungeons and Dragons, or rock and roll, or computer games, and it wouldn't prove much of anything.
No, asking them simply what prompted them to rape (assuming they're honest, and yes, that's a big assumption, but I'm sure many rapists have little incentive to lie in the context of a scientific study).
I'm saying it to you because you're an active participant in this thread, which infers you have an interest in what's being written, and you claim to have little trust in 'studies' and statistics.
In general, again, I do. Lies, damned lies, and statistics, after all. I've learned that believing information simply because it has the words "studies show" attached to it is fallacious and unwise. So my level of trust would depend on the specific study, who conducted it, how, and other considerations.
I previously implied the same, and suggested that simply asking rapists what prompted them to rape might be a more reliable method of seeking a correlation between porn and rape.
It would be part of it, I would think, yes. I admit, I'm surprised it's not being done--unless it is, and we just aren't yet aware of it. But I agree: it seems an integral part of such an examination.
I'm sorry to learn that, and I'm sorry that you find my choice of a figure of speach vaguely insulting. I'm not suggesting that you should be the one to undertake the research.
Do you have any reason to think that this will give us reliable data? "They have no reason I know of to lie" is not much of a reason - the same logic is applied to people who claim to have been abducted by aliens.
They could say it was porn, or the Devil, or violence on television, or Dungeons and Dragons, or rock and roll, or computer games, and it wouldn't prove much of anything.
This is largely my point; that the seemingly statistical data is at least as unreliable as asking the perpetrators their motives. That's why, earlier on, I suggested that even if you could identify a seemingly reverse correlation between the proliferation of porn and the incidence of rape it would tell you no more than a reverse correlation with the incidence of iPod use, eating BigMacs, etc. would. It's the old Pastafarian pirates again!
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
