• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Moderated What's wrong with porn?

Questions for Randfan (or anybody else, for that matter!) (yes/no/don't know answers will suffice, where applicable):

  1. Do you believe that there is no causative link between porn and crime?
  2. Do you think or know that possible causation between porn and crime is capable of conclusive study?
  3. Do you actually know of any conclusive studies regarding possible causative links between porn and crime?
  4. If you do know of any conclusive studies regarding possible causative links between porn and crime would you be so kind as to identify them?
  5. If there are no conclusive studies regarding causative links between porn and crime do you think that's a good reason to ignore the possibility of a link and err on the side of perpetrators of crimes to the possible detriment of victims (children) of crime for the sole purpose of satisfying an extremely small innocent minority interest?
 
Last edited:
I'll take this one. Let me wait while SW puts his fingers in his ears and starts to say "LA LA LA LA" :whistling

All set, SW? Here I go!

Southwind17 said:
Questions for Randfan (or anybody else, for that matter!) (yes/no/don't know answers will suffice, where applicable):


[*]Do you believe that there is no causative link between porn and crime?
Click to expand...

Yes. In fact, it's shown that porn seems to reduce crime, specifically rape. (And isn't child molestation a form of rape?)

[*]Do you think or know that possible causation between porn and crime is capable of conclusive study?
Click to expand...

Check out the Meese Report. http://www.porn-report.com/

We've been over this question quite a few times.

[*]Do you actually know of any conclusive studies regarding possible causative links between porn and crime?
Click to expand...

See above. It's there. Have fun.

[*]If you do know of any conclusive studies regarding possible causative links between porn and crime would you be so kind as to identify them?
Click to expand...

:yawn: Scroll up.

[*]If there are no conclusive studies regarding causative links between porn and crime do you think that's a good reason to ignore the possibility of a link and err on the side of perpetrators of crimes to the possible detriment of victims (children) of crime for the sole purpose of satisfying an extremely small innocent minority interest?
Click to expand...

Ah... here we go. "Since we can't prove it, since we can't test it, we should THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Hey, here's a logic. If there are no conclusive studies regarding the existence of god, do you think that's a good reason to ignore the possibility of a god and err on the side of the athiests to the possible detriment of your own life for the sole purpose of satisfying an extremely small innocent minority interest?

Spoken like a true fundamentalist.




ETA: What? There's no Yawn emote??? Awwww......
 
Last edited:
This research paper from July 2007 affords a more balanced general picture regarding law enforcement agencies' attitudes towards possession of child porn (see "Results" section - p.275 onwards).
 
Southwind17 said:
:boggled: You really should learn to read more carefully.

ETA: on reflection you really should learn to read - period!
Click to expand...

And you should really learn to face up to the challenges you claim you are looking for. Instead, you seem to be enjoying the sound of your own voice.

Your logic is flawed. You've completely ignored not only me, but some evidence that was presented earlier in favor of your own beliefs. And that's all they are - beliefs. Your questions have shown that. You are erroring on the side of caution and arguing that it's a legitimate argument.

Once again, you have come clean: you are going on beliefs. Now it's time to admit it to yourself so we can have a discussion. SugarB can do it well: we can disagree and have a legitimate, civil, logical discussion. Can you?
 
Last edited:
Hey Belz!!! How are you. I thought I saw you in the SW Ignore Club! Here, sit with me. I just ordered some food. You want anything?

Belz... said:
It's just weasel words. But don't tell him I said that. He might put you on ignore and me on SUPER-ignore.
Click to expand...

Is that like "double secret probation"? :D
 
JFrankA said:
Hey Belz!!! How are you. I thought I saw you in the SW Ignore Club! Here, sit with me. I just ordered some food. You want anything?



Is that like "double secret probation"? :D
Click to expand...

I actually read "double penetration", then I looked again.
 
Southwind17 said:
If you're going to resort to this position why didn't you come into this thread with the honest statement "Unless you can show a link between porn and crime I'm not interested in a debate here, and BTW, just like there are no definitive studies showing a link between violent console games and violent crime I doubt you'll find any studies relating to porn and crime. Ergo, I win. QED!"
Click to expand...

Looks like you've also lost in a thread about violent computer games.
Without participating in it, no less!
 
Eddie Dane said:
Looks like you've also lost in a thread about violent computer games.
Without participating in it, no less!
Click to expand...

Good point:

If there are no conclusive studies regarding causative links between violent computer games and crime do you think that's a good reason to ignore the possibility of a link and err on the side of perpetrators of crimes to the possible detriment of victims of violent crime for the sole purpose of satisfying an extremely small innocent minority interest?
Click to expand...

Yup. Looks like SW's "logic" works for that too.....
 
Southwind17 said:
Questions for Randfan (or anybody else, for that matter!) (yes/no/don't know answers will suffice, where applicable):

  1. Do you believe that there is no causative link between porn and crime?
  2. Do you think or know that possible causation between porn and crime is capable of conclusive study?
  3. Do you actually know of any conclusive studies regarding possible causative links between porn and crime?
  4. If you do know of any conclusive studies regarding possible causative links between porn and crime would you be so kind as to identify them?
  5. If there are no conclusive studies regarding causative links between porn and crime do you think that's a good reason to ignore the possibility of a link and err on the side of perpetrators of crimes to the possible detriment of victims (children) of crime for the sole purpose of satisfying an extremely small innocent minority interest?
Click to expand...

JFrankA said:
I'll take this one. All set, SW? Here I go!

  1. Yes. In fact, it's shown that porn seems to reduce crime, specifically rape. (And isn't child molestation a form of rape?)
  2. Check out the Meese Report. http://www.porn-report.com/ We've been over this question quite a few times.
  3. See above. It's there. Have fun.
  4. :yawn: Scroll up.
Click to expand...

Some choice extracts from the wonderfully conclusive Meese Report (Part 4: Chapter 3) [emboldening all mine]:

One of the most frequently cited studies has been the analysis of sex crimes in Denmark before and after the legalization of pornography in the 1960s (see Kutchinsky, 1973; BenVeniste, 1970). Kutchinsky's data showed a drop in the number of reported sex crimes after legalization and he argued that the availability of pornography is cathartic as it siphons off potentially dangerous sex impulses-the "safety valve theory" (Kutchinsky, 1970, p. 288; Kutchinsky, 1973). Kutchinsky's work was lauded by the British pornography commission (Williams, 1979) for its thoroughness and the restraint with which he interpreted his findings. It singled out the dramatic reduction in offenses against children coinciding with the availability of pornography and, while the Commission did not endorse the "safety valve" hypothesis, agreed that Kutchinsky's interpretation was plausible, absent any other likely factor (p. 84).

On the other hand, Kutchinsky's study and conclusions did not go unchallenged. First, the weight of empirical evidence amassed in the last two decades by social psychologists, particularly in the area of media violence and aggressive behavior, hardly supports catharsis (see Weiss, 1969; Geen and Quanty, 1977; Bandura, 1973; Bramel, 1969; Comstock, In Press; NIMH, 1982).

Second, a number of problems have been raised with Kutchinsky's analysis and interpretations (see Cline, 1974; Bachy, 1976; Court, 1977; Baron, 1984; Malamuth and Billings, 1985). Some of these problems included the lumping together of sex offenses masked a stable, if not an increased, rape rate (Cline, 1974; Court, 1984).

More recently, Kutchinsky (1985) has maintained that the increased availability of "hard-core" pornography in Denmark "may have been the direct cause of the real decrease in incidents of peeping and child molestation" (p. 313) and has proposed the "substitution" hypothesis as the most likely explanation. He further cites a similar pattern in West Germany with legalization of pornography in 1973 bringing about a decrease in sex offenses against children. This proposed causal link should be viewed with extreme caution, particularly since pornography availability statistics have not been presented.

Other data are available that allow further cross-cultural comparisons. Abramson and Hayashi (1984), in analyzing pornography in Japan, noted that while it was illegal to show pubic hair and adult genitals in sexually explicit stimuli, pornography appeared to be widely available in this country, including the prevalence of bondage and rape as recurring themes. In terms of rape statistics, however, they concluded that a low incidence of rape appears to be the case and suggested that certain socio-cultural mediating circumstances may be involved. Unfortunately, no data are provided by Abramson and Hayashi on availability or rape rates and at least one study indicates that these rates may actually be increasing.

Other cross-national data from areas as disparate as England, Australia, Singapore, and South Africa were analyzed by Court (1977, 1982, 1984). His studies compared rape rates in countries or areas where pornography is widely available, and those where restrictions exist. On the basis of his findings, Court advanced the propositions that (1) rape reports have increased where pornography laws have been liberalized, while the same steep rise is not in evidence where restrictions exist

More recently, correlational evidence using more detailed statistical analyses, presents some additional insight into the pornography-sex crimes relationship on the aggregate or societal level in the United States (Baron and Straus, 1985). A fifty-state correlational analysis of rape rates and circulation rates of adult magazines was conducted, using aggregate circulation rates (subscription and newsstand sales per 100,000 population), for eight magazines (Chic, Club, Gallery, Genesis, Hustler, Oui, Playboy, and Penthouse). A fairly strong correlation+.64-was found between these circulation rates and rape rates. This relationship was present even with controls for potential confounding variables such as police practices (measured by police expenditures per capita), propensity to report rape (measured by number of rape crisis centers per 100,000 females ...

Finally, the level of social disorganization was also found to be directly related with rape rates and to affect these rates indirectly through its association with the circulation of pornography and the status of women. Other factors found to correlate with rape rates were the extent of urbanization, economic inequality, and unemployment.

Using the Baron and Straus data set, Scott and Schwalm (1985) essentially confirmed the sex magazine-rape rate relationship although their additional analysis showed that when rape rates were correlated with specific magazines, these correlations were higher for Playboy, Penthouse, and Oui than they were for Hustler magazine. Their contention was that sexual content in Hustler magazine was more likely to be associated with rape since this magazine has more sexually violent material than the other three magazines. Since correlations with the other four magazines were not provided, it is difficult to judge the consistency of such a pattern. Furthermore, such a breakdown is again not very helpful since the level of analysis is aggregate rather than individual. Thus, on an individual level, it will be more meaningful to correlate an individual's scores on sexual aggression measures and that individual's readership of specific magazines; on an aggregate level, it is more appropriate to relate the aggregate offense rate with aggregate availability figures for the material in question. And even on the individual level, there may still be some question as to the actual separability of individual magazine readership.

Scott (1985) further examined the correlation between adult theaters and rape rates for 1982 and found no relationship to exist. It is quite possible that this finding may be an artifact of the decreasing number of adult theaters in this country as a result of the rise of home videos, as Scott himself pointed out (see also Newsweek, 1985; Knowledge Industries, 1985). He also correlated the number of adult bookstores in each state and rape rates and again, found no relationship. Scott's data may not necessarily be inconsistent with Baron and Straus.' It is quite conceivable that the number of stores may not correlate with rape rates but the actual circulation of the magazines in various outlets do. In any case, Scott's endorsement of the "safety valve" or catharsis hypothesis on the basis of his findings appears premature at the very least.

While Baron and Straus' work is impressive for its methodological care and thoroughness, their findings do not indicate that men are induced to rape as a result of exposure to these magazines. While this is certainly plausible, there are two caveats to their analysis. First, it is a macro-model that is being tested, examining the relationship of various socialcultural factors on rape. Second, given that this is a correlational study, there is always the possibility that there may be some third factor influencing the observed sex-magazine rape rate relationship.[1122] The crucial causal evidence has to come from an examination of the relationship under controlled conditions, and these studies are discussed below under "Experimental Findings."

In the case of rape rates and circulation rates of adult magazines, establishing a significant correlation between the two is a first step. That such a relationship may in fact be a spurious one due to the existence of some third factor is a second step in establishing the validity of the relationship. Unlike experimental situations, however, where most "alternative factors" are controlled for, by randomly assigning subjects to experimental conditions, one has to be able to identify every potentially significant "third factor" in correlational research and actually account for these in the analysis. Therefore, we find ourselves, at most, in the position of accepting an observed relationship as being plausible but yet cannot fully preclude the possibility of its being spurious.

Summary for Violent and Nonviolent Sexually Explicit Materials

In evaluating the results for sexually violent material, it appears that exposure to such materials (1) leads to a greater acceptance of rape myths and violence against women; (2) have more pronounced effects when the victim is shown enjoying the use of force or violence; (3) is arousing for rapists and for some males in the general population; and (4) has resulted in sexual aggression against women in the laboratory.

Malamuth's (In Press) research has further demonstrated that such attitudes as rape myth acceptance and acceptance of violence against women are correlated with arousal to such materials and with "real-world" sexual aggression and that subjects who have demonstrated sexual aggression in the laboratory are also more likely to report using coercion and force in their actual sexual interactions. The validation of the measures used in his studies, the use of physiological measures of arousal, and the attempt to systematically examine patterns among different populations with a variety of measures, arousal, attitudinal and behavorial, all tend to provide the type of convergent validation we feel is required of social science evidence.

We are less confident about the findings for nonviolent sexually explicit materials and we hasten to add that this is not necessarily because this class of materials has no effects but because the wide variety of effects obtained needs to be more systematically examined and explained.

There are very tentative suggestions that the manner in which the woman is portrayed in the material (i.e., whether she is portrayed in a demeaning or degrading fashion) might be an important content factor but this is clearly an area that should be investigated.

This serves as a perfect example as to why I ended our debate and put you on ignore. More the fool me for allowing my better judgement to temporarily waiver. Back you go - PERMANENTLY!
 
Last edited:
Southwind17 said:
How convenient. So you disagree, then, that virtual child porn advocates child abuse given that it portrays child abuse? If so, by what application of logic? If not, you're admitting that you're in favour of advocating child abuse, right? Which is it?
Click to expand...

Amusing. Since when does portraying a behaviour in fiction lead to that behaviour in reality ?
 
I wonder what it must be like living one's life where decisions may only be made on the known existence or otherwise of causative links. It must be very restrictive, undynamic and dull, I should think. Oh well ... horses for courses; each to his own; live and let live! :)
 
Southwind17 said:
<snip>

This serves as a perfect example as to why I ended our debate and put you on ignore. More the fool me for allowing my better judgement to temporarily waiver. Back you go - PERMANENTLY!
Click to expand...

You are amusing. It's like you scored four runs in the top of the sixth inning, got ahead a little and said "The game is over!!! I win!!!" and ran home.

The only mistake I made is that I didn't do enough research.

http://www.nydailynews.com/money/2009/02/02/2009-02-02_study_finds_online_porn_may_reduce_the_i.html

Now after doing more reading, there are people who say neither side (porn reduces rape vs porn increases rape) is right:

http://forensicpsychologist.blogspot.com/2009/06/new-entry-in-porn-rape-debate.html

http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2009/07/more-porn-does-not-lead-to-less-rape-or.php


Which leads me to conclude, (and if my logic is faulty some reasonable people please point it out to me), that I was right:

No matter what a person may look at, no matter if it's bloody violent child rape porn or fuzzy little bunnies eating carrots, a person will decide to do something on her or his own accord, and whatever media is being watched will NOT ALTER THAT PERSON'S CHOICE.

Again: The person is responsible. NOT THE MEDIA.

But since you refuse to debate me, for whatever reason it's still unclear to me because I've been respectful, you have allowed me to take my ball and play fungo, allowing me to walk around the bases.

You shouldn't leave the game when it's your opponent's turn at bat.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom