Should Pornography Be ILLEGAL???? 🙈

[00 Deleted member 00]

I go to adult chat and see porn every where we've all seen it. I here watching it makes you live longer lol don't know if that'd be true or not lol

 

[Deleted member 304663]

I go to adult chat and see porn every where we've all seen it. I here watching it makes you live longer lol don't know if that'd be true or not lol

Tell us more

We're keen

 

[Inkandtatts]

I go to adult chat and see porn every where we've all seen it. I here watching it makes you live longer lol don't know if that'd be true or not lol

I think you misheard. It was “last longer” especially if you do pelvic floor exercises while watching it.

You’re sincerely,
CBC

 

[Deleted member 304663]

I think you misheard. It was “last longer” especially if you do pelvic floor exercises while watching it.

You’re sincerely,
CBC

Is this your professional advice luv? lol

 

[DontCostYaNuffin]

Agreed, if anything it’s only getting bigger and more accepting globally. However, it now seems to be more age regulated which is appreciated considering how many kids have access to the internet now. Either way, is it healthy for the brain? I think we all know it isn’t.

Should it be banned? I don’t think so, adults should be able to manage their own life and capabilities.

Banning it would be stupid. There are plenty of reputable studies out there that have found a positive correlation between the subjects’ p0rn viewing and their overall well-being. Even if there wasn’t a positive correlation, I still wouldn’t want it to be banned. Regulated, yes, in order to protect people from being exploited.

I’m very much pro-choice when it comes to ethical and moral issues. I’m also in favour of same-sex marriage, the right to an abortion, euthanasia, and the right to gender-affirming surgery. These things have all been realized in my country ages ago. Watching these other countries debate it, is like looking back at my country 30 years ago.

 

[Deleted member 304663]

Banning it would be stupid. There are plenty of reputable studies out there that have found a positive correlation between the subjects’ p0rn viewing and their overall well-being. Even if there wasn’t a positive correlation, I still wouldn’t want it to be banned. Regulated, yes, in order to protect people from being exploited.

I’m very much pro-choice when it comes to ethical and moral issues. I’m also in favour of same-sex marriage, the right to an abortion, euthanasia, and the right to gender-affirming surgery. These things have all been realized in my country ages ago. Watching these other countries debate it, is like looking back at my country 30 years ago.

So what genre ya like? lol

Enough of this small talk.

 

[DontCostYaNuffin]

So what genre ya like? lol

Enough of this small talk.

D&D

 

[Deleted member 304663]

D&D
**]hJAGxAeV7YU[/MEDIA]

And the urinal strikes again!

 

[DontCostYaNuffin]

And the urinal strikes again!

 

[Deleted member 304663]

Oh my he looks Dutch

 

[Inkandtatts]

Ooh err bishop. These knights are in trouble

All this hardcore pawn is going to rot their brains and make them knock the Queen out

 

[Deleted member 304663]

Let's go

@Chatmaster - look away....

 

[TheDifference]

all the staff of the Adult,, Sex, and Gay rooms are exposed to pornographic material daily. I could be wrong but I don’t think it’s done anything to our brains.

 

[Deleted member 304663]

No wonder you're so hard to catch.

 

[Inkandtatts]

Anyone taking a position on anything would be charged with bias if that was the case. But it is grounds to check their studies/sources)

edit:
Ad hominem
This is a fallacy in which a claim is rejected on the basis of an aspect of someone's character, identity, motivations, or even the relationships they have with others.

Come on, an anti porn group is only going to present anti-porn studies/stats in the same way as everything presented by the anti-abortion people will only convince others that abortion is evil.

The whole premise that porn causes violence is as wrong as saying violence depicted in movies causes violence.

The only way for the point to be made is for all violent crimes against women to be collated and then to look at how many of those offences were committed because of porn. My money would be on 0.

There is no excuse at all for anyone to be violent - ever.

I don’t know what the purpose of your edit is so I can’t comment on that part.

 

[Deleted member 263960]

Come on, an anti porn group is only going to present anti-porn studies/stats in the same way as everything presented

Every person/organization taking a side in a debate would be expected to present studies, cite sources etc that support their argument- whether for or against anything, I cant imagine them doing anything but.

Presenting facts that support a premise to arrive at a conclusion is expected. The fact anyone is pro or against anything isnt proof they are biased or more importantly- wrong. The claim of bias couldnt be raised legitimately unless for example they funded a particular study they cite,

My particular argument is this-since its proven that porn is harmful, and there is a lot of evidence to that. The real question is how harmful, and who does it harm, and what kind of harm is caused.

If any harm can be proven to some degree (and it has been) then criminal sanction could be justified, because criminal sanction is used precisely to prevent or punish those doing harm to others.

 

[Deleted member 263960]

It would be interesting to see any independent studies showing the number of cases of violence against women being attributed to watching porn which at trial would likely (if the argument is accepted) provide a defence/mitigation on the basis of diminished responsibility or insanity. The only published examples I recall of people arguing “porn made me do it” involved offenders who had mental illnesses.


Maybe we could do a real study here. Before I get on to that though, all the staff of the Adult,, Sex, and Gay rooms are exposed to pornographic material daily. I could be wrong but I don’t think it’s done anything to our brains.

Everyone, I think we should do a study:

Have you/do you watch porn? Has it caused you to be violent towards anyone?

I’ll go first:

Yes I see a lot of pornographic material in Gay Chat.

Yes I’ve watched porn.

No I’ve never been violent towards a woman. Other than defending myself, I’ve never been violent towards anyone else



This is what I was thinking too. It’s a given that the question posed is “should regulated porn be illegal?” since it’s not asking about the types of porn that are already illegal

nothing ive said is intended to pertain to any chatroom on site. (OP said porn in relation to legality only)

If you reject anecdotal accounts by one side you cant use the same for it in opposition. Im also thinking seeing porn as part of a "job" isnt the same thing as being addicted to it or using it for gratification.

This is what I was thinking too. It’s a given that the question posed is “should regulated porn be illegal?

It makes no difference whether things that have never been shown to increase violence against women (like weed, cigarettes, sugar and candy should be or are "regulated" . (With the exception of alcohol. ) the pot reference was a bit far fetched and no study has ever shown it causes violence.

“should regulated porn be illegal?

Canada is trying to regulate pornhub . Because its not regulated. That is the porn OP meant ( I assume) which is not currently illegal in Canada.

Right now minors can access the porn people want to stay legal:

 

[rapinoes smirking revenge]

but it hasn't been "proven to be harmful' and there has been no evidence showed proving that it is. what isn't regulated about pornhub?

 

[Deleted member 263960]

The whole premise that porn causes violence is as wrong as saying violence depicted in movies causes violence.

I made no such argument, I did argue there is a correlation and showed several examples of studies proving that correlation.

 

[Deleted member 263960]

Come on, an anti porn group is only going to present anti-porn studies/stats in the same way as everything presented by the anti-abortion people will only convince others that abortion is evil.

The whole premise that porn causes violence is as wrong as saying violence depicted in movies causes violence.

The only way for the point to be made is for all violent crimes against women to be collated and then to look at how many of those offences were committed because of porn. My money would be on 0.

There is no excuse at all for anyone to be violent - ever.

I don’t know what the purpose of your edit is so I can’t comment on that part.

Court case re sentencing Jeffrey Dahmer is one case (although not directed at women )

"Because of Porn" again you challenge causation, but these cases show correlation and argueably causation .

Consider this criminologist "Violent porn can be “a facilitator for one person, while having no effect on others," a 2017 Psychology Today article citing research by criminologist Eric Hickey states. "Still, the fact the certain serial murderers have insisted that pornography was a major factor in their killing young women and children cannot be ignored.'"

 

[paulo420uk 2.0]

You be hanging out with @paulo420uk 2.0

CLEM I always knew you fancied the pants off me. All you need to do is ask to see me unclothed and I am more than happy to do it for you. Mwah x

 

[Inkandtatts]

My particular argument is this-since its proven that porn is harmful, and there is a lot of evidence to that.

But all you’ve provided to support that position is a study by an anti-porn group. @DontCostYaNuffin has provided a study that says the opposite and that it is in fact a good thing.

You even seem to agree the bias point relating to the anti-porn group in this comment but now you say something different on that:

edit:
Ad hominem
This is a fallacy in which a claim is rejected on the basis of an aspect of someone's character, identity, motivations, or even the relationships they have with others.

nothing ive said is intended to pertain to any chatroom on site. (OP said porn in relation to legality only)

All 4 adult rooms allow gifs/images of porn. Many of them are from ph. If porn should be illegal then it surely follows that the view is that this site shouldn’t break the law by allowing porn, should it be made illegal.

Canada is trying to regulate pornhub . Because its not regulated.

Of course it’s regulated. There are certain types of porn that are illegal and can’t be shown on there or any site legally. There are mechanisms for reporting anything that looks suspicious. There was a case where a video was taken down on ph and the studio that produced it had to evidence the age of the actors before it was allowed back. That particular video imo shouldn’t be allowed but it shows that it is regulated and it is policed.

Right now minors can access the porn people want to stay legal:

Yes and that’s a different argument which I believe various governments are trying to tackle. It’s certainly not a valid argument for saying porn should be illegal. Minors can watch normal (non-porn) movies rated over their age on TV unless their parents stop them from doing so, so if this argument carried weight then there’d be an argument for outlawing all adult rated movies.

Consider this criminologist "Violent porn can be “a facilitator for one person, while having no effect on others," a 2017 Psychology Today article citing research by criminologist Eric Hickey states. "Still, the fact the certain serial murderers have insisted that pornography was a major factor in their killing young women and children cannot be ignored.'"

Is your position limited then to violent porn? If so that’s different and is more nuanced.

You’re not including what types of porn they’ve watched and whether those are legal or illegal. Convicted paedophiles blame child porn but of course that is already illegal. Perhaps it’s similar with all these murderers - they’ve watched illegal porn already.

In any event, I’m sure several serial murders insist anything is a major factor in their killing of victims as part of their defence of a crime that carries a heavy punishment.

Court case re sentencing Jeffrey Dahmer is one case (although not directed at women )

"Because of Porn" again you challenge causation, but these cases show correlation and argueably causation .

I can see you’re very passionate about porn but using Dahmer as the only example is extremely far fetched.

He had psychotic disorder, borderline personality disorder, and scizotypal disorder.

His murders involved cannibalism, necrophilia, snd doing things with body parts. Unless you’ve seen something I haven’t on ph, none of that activity is allowed there (or legal)

I wonder if Dhamer ate pork. They say that’s the closest taste to human flesh. Maybe pork should be illegal just in case.

According to the BBC around half of UK adults watch porn.

When ph released its last stats in 2019, they were getting 80,000 visits a minute and had 22 million registered users.

In 2020, the top 3 porn sites globally had a higher viewership than Netflix, hitting almost 6 billion visits a month.

The numbers don’t add up to support a view that porn is a direct cause of violence or in the case you’ve quoted murder, cannibalism, dismemberment, or necrophilia - and there are zero cases to support that position.

To make the case, you’re going to need to show cases where the defendant had no mental health issues and argued that the sole reason they were violent, murdered someone, or ate someone, was because they watched porn. I’d bet every penny I have that there won’t be any cases like that.


Unrelated to this debate but if you quote properly it makes is much easier for readers to look at the quote in context (and saves me scrolling to find what I said)

 

[Inkandtatts]

Solution:

Keep it legal. Play wherever this sound is before and after each video:

This is what erectile dysfunction and sterilisation sounds like.

https://*******.com/1iZlNdFdr3Gh

Not sure that it will deter the violent women or the female cannibals that watch porn and blame their violence and propensity to eat people on porn, so this could be added for women:

 

[rapinoes smirking revenge]

minors get their hands on alcohol, tobacco. kids who aren't legal age to drive yet sneak out with their parent's car. they sneak into r rated films, play adult rated video games. rules and regulations don't 100% stop anything from happening. nor does banning or criminalization, prohibition really put an end to alcohol. come up with better ways of keeping minors from having access to it? great. want to get rid of certain types of porn? yeah that's a discussion to be had. outright banning something because it might possibly have the slightest effect on a small percentage of people (which hasn't even been shown) just doesn't make any sense.

 

[Inkandtatts]

outright banning something because it might possibly have the slightest effect on a small percentage of people (which hasn't even been shown) just doesn't make any sense.

Precisely. Correlation is always a weak basis to support any point on anything. It has its place, perhaps as a starting point, but sometimes as with porn and violence the correlation is so obviously wrong

 

[Deleted member 263960]

But all you’ve provided to support that position is a study by an anti-porn group. @DontCostYaNuffin has provided a study that says the opposite and that it is in fact a good thing.

no, what I did was show several studies, peer reviewed, and some in medical journals, that a group opposed to pornography referenced. That group didn't conduct the studies themselves no bias was shown..

All 4 adult rooms allow gifs/images of porn.

The OP didnt mention this site- neither do I.

Is your position limited then to violent porn? If so that’s different and is more nuanced.

The OP didn't specify, and I previously answered this. MY argument? Primarily violent porn yes, porn that is aggressive towards women, choking and the like is the most clearly associated with violent behaviour among consumers.

I can see you’re very passionate about porn but using Dahmer as the only example is extremely far fetched.

Bundy did to. I think I read something to similar effect on Gacy, these examples are not mine- I cited a respected criminologist who said those facts about various serial killers "cannot be ignored" those also coborrate what the Ministry of Attorney General of various provinces show in various reports, and case files. Sexual offenders use porn . It not rare, its not unheard of. In fact its very common. And its not limited by any means to CP.

To make the case, you’re going to need to show cases where the defendant had no mental health issues and argued that the sole reason

I never said it was the sole reason, Also Big Tobacco and the Gun Lobby have used similar reasoning that you have in their arguments, rather than say" yeah we know our product is harmful and this is what we will do about it...."

. @DontCostYaNuffin has provided a study

He conducted more than a few porn studies of his own in General Chat .

Precisely. Correlation is always a weak basis to support any point on anything. It has its place, perhaps as a starting point, but sometimes as with porn and violence the correlation is so obviously wrong

Corelation is not weak unless its proven to be a false corelation, and that's when its the conclusion -not the premise- or a supporting argument.

The ground breaking Bobo Doll experiment at Stanford clearly showed "monkey see monkey do " and many studies in the decades that followed showed similar findings in relation to the behaviour of men in particular. At a bare minimum Its better such porn be illegal until such time as only "adults" can access it.

 

[DontCostYaNuffin]

“At the population level, studies explored the relationship between pornography consumers and sexual violence, and found that an increase in available pornography reduced sexual aggression”

This study was conducted by Chris Ferguson and Richard Hartley. chair of UTSA’s Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice. The authors conducted meta-analytic research and examined more than 50 correlational, experimental and population studies that explored the association between pornography and sexual aggression during the past 40 years.

Unfortunately I wasn’t allowed to post a link to said study:

 

[DontCostYaNuffin]

All of them were blindfolded studies, I mean blinded studies.

 

[-Luka]

Debate forum rules apply. Links are allowed to backup posts.

Proven example My link was allowed about Shannen Doherty so…

Edit: rule 3

View attachment 975038

 

[Deleted member 263960]

Debate forum rules apply. Links are allowed to backup posts.

Proven example My link was allowed about Shannen Doherty so…

external links are not allowed .

 

[-Luka]

no, external allowed

it may be of best interest to remain neutral on that rule since external links which relate to topic/post confirming facts (or even to confirm where the poster is basing their responses) are also being confirmed by rule 3.

 

[Deleted member 263960]

it may be of best interest to remain neutral on that rule since external links which relate to topic/post confirming facts (or even to confirm where the poster is basing their responses) are also being confirmed by rule 3.

that's an old rule- one of many that are outdated on forums as you rightly mentioned before.

"Links to other websites - Links are not allowed in threads. Personal links to your website or websites you are affiliated with are NOT allowed. It will be deleted." - CM forum rules

 

[-Luka]

that's an old rule- one of many that are outdated on forums as you rightly mentioned before.

Correct. Many rules are outdated, that doesn’t mean they’re wrong. That’s why I suggested remaining neutral because it’s debate forum.

Edit: it’s debate forum rules

 

[Deleted member 263960]

Correct. Many rules are outdated, that doesn’t mean they’re wrong. That’s why I suggested remaining neutral because it’s debate forum.

Edit: it’s debate forum rules

Lets just go by what CM says in the forums rules- i added bold- what does that last part mean?

 

[-Luka]

Lets just go by what CM says in the forums rules- i added bold- what does that last part mean?

Well it means it’s debate forum. Dutchy is posting his view, you are posting yours. Links are allowed as per rule 3 in my screenshot (since you’ve now edited the rule) because Dutchys post is on topic. You can do the same.

Not just this forum but any forum. Again, my post in celeb forum about Shannen Doherty I used an external link so people could read it if they wanted to. Thats not against the rules. Those forum rules were made in 2005. No links are allowed but we can post external links and social media profiles within our profile.

Hence. Why. I. Said. Stay. Neutral. In. Debate. Forum.

that’s my opinion which has now contributed to derailment.

TLDR if links were posted to an insecure page, I’d understand. The preview is in the link confirming legit source.

 

[Deleted member 263960]

Well it means it’s debate forum. Dutchy is posting his view, you are posting yours. Links are allowed as per rule 3 in my screenshot (since you’ve now edited the rule) because Dutchys post is on topic. You can do the same.

Not just this forum but any forum. Again, my post in celeb forum about Shannen Doherty I used an external link so people could read it if they wanted to. Thats not against the rules. Those forum rules were made in 2005. No links are allowed but we can post external links and social media profiles within our profile.

Hence. Why. I. Said. Stay. Neutral. In. Debate. Forum.

that’s my opinion which has now contributed to derailment.

TLDR if links were posted to an insecure page, I’d understand. The preview is in the link confirming legit source.

i just looked, this was previously answered by CM< i'm wrong- you can use links (move along please nothing to see folks....)

 

[babydolla]

weird that @Akrta voted yes, in favor of banning pornography 🤔

she literally volunteered to be a mod in sex chat, whos ass is she kissing exactly here??

a n y w a y s

just about all of the things you guys compared to pornography that should sarcastically be banned too; aren’t in the same league, they’re not even in the same ballpark as addiction to pornography…

these things don’t cause nearly the same detriment to a person’s life as porn addiction does; now do i think a porn addiction is going to make you into a serial killer like that rex feller in long island, hacking away at prostitutes on the beach? no of course not that’s silly 🙂‍↔️

…you’d has to already be a sexist sociopath with no influence from porn wat-so-ever to start doing that…

its going to permanently damage your brain chemistry, ruin your sexual health, make you depressed, perhaps even weird, & make u with drawn from your luv’d ones while also making you a less productive person 👺

this of course is especially detrimental to teenagers, & young adults; eduction, & a more ethical industry isn’t fixing the addiction, & like drugs which has similar effects on the brain should be illegal too

im just playin’, but i’m sayin’

 

[Inkandtatts]

no, what I did was show several studies, peer reviewed, and some in medical journals, that a group opposed to pornography referenced. That group didn't conduct the studies themselves so bias was shown..

I agree, bias was shown.

Bundy did to.

Oh come on - that’s even more weak than Dhamer. You’re referencing an interview with a fake cleric that was a Republican activist trying to sway public opinion against porn.

This is from an article about the interview. Quotes aren’t from anyone here. I copy pasted and it put them in quotes:

Criminologists were asked about it. One named William Wilbanks was quoted in news reports explaining the interview could not be taken at face value. He says:

“By placing the blame on porn, Bundy absolved himself of personal responsibility and portrayed himself as a victim of porn. His suggestion that he was not trying to avoid responsibility was either a self-deception or a final ‘con’ on the public he so despises.”

In period news reports, Bundy biographer Stephen Michaud dismissed it completely. “Look,” he said:

“…the last time Bundy was caught, you know what he had in his car? A stack of well-thumbed pamphlets for cheerleader training schools. He was into cheerleader pamphlets, and he wasn’t using them for scratch paper. He also got off on his college physiology text, which had diagrams of female genitalia.”

The OP didnt mention this site- neither do I.

The OP mentions porn. You mention porn. Everybody in this thread is talking about…porn. The site allows porn in certain rooms. If porn was illegal as is being advocated here then surely it follows that the site wouldn’t allow porn? Or am I being completely thick and missing something?

The OP didn't specify, and I previously answered this. MY argument? Primarily violent porn yes, porn that is aggressive towards women, choking and the like is the most clearly associated with violent behaviour among consumers.

But the question was all porn. The OP was very clear about that.

If someone watched porn that involves choking and then goes out and chokes someone, you surely aren’t saying that the porn would be to blame?

I saw a clip of Hannibal after referencing it earlier and so far I’m not getting any urges to carve into anyone’s skull and eat their brain for dinner.

He conducted more than a few porn studies of his own in General Chat .

Are you putting him forward as an expert on the subject?

Corelation is not weak unless its proven to be a false corelation,

I disagree.

Anybody can push correlation to support their agenda. My examples already given on race and crime prove that.

At a bare minimum Its better such porn be illegal until such time as only "adults" can access it.

You’ve mentioned several times what the OP referred to. The OP hasn’t asked anything about kids and porn. You’re moving the goalposts of the debate. The only person that has brought kids up, I believe, is you. Not one person here in their right mind is going to say that kids should be allowed to watch porn. The debate is surely about adults, unless @babydolla says differently?

The ground breaking Bobo Doll experiment at Stanford clearly showed "monkey see monkey do " and many studies in the decades that followed showed similar findings in relation to the behaviour of men in particular.

That “ground breaking” study was on children ages between 3 and 6, with an average age of 4 and proved that children can learn through observation and later imitating the same behaviors with a combination of environmental and cognitive processes.

I am not sure why you’re quoting a study that says 4-year old children learn from their environment. It’s hardly ground breaking and I really don’t see what referencing that study does to aid the debate on whether porn should be illegal for adults to view.



The best studies to read are the ones that take into account both sides of the debate and every single one of those that I’ve read concludes that there isn’t sufficient evidence to show that watching porn leads to (or makes more likely) murder, violence, choking, cannibalism, or dismemberment of other people.

 

[Deleted member 306961]

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on *******.

youtu.be

 

[babydolla]

You’ve mentioned several times what the OP referred to. The OP hasn’t asked anything about kids and porn. You’re moving the goalposts of the debate. The only person that has brought kids up, I believe, is you. Not one person here in their right mind is going to say that kids should be allowed to watch porn. The debate is surely about adults, unless @babydolla says differently?

the subject is specifically the dangers pornography poses to the brain chemistry of teenagers, young adults, & grown adults alike; & thus should be criminalized in the same fashion most drugs are criminalized for the very same reason...

the topic isn't about the morality or ethics of watching porn, & who should / shouldn't be watching it though these things do play a factor into the dangers of porn; frankly the true danger however is the addiction it causes, & the poisoning of the mind when watched excessively (addiction) regardless of the viewer's age 🍜

...the whole destruction of the family unit, & such...

but i think it's a given that children shouldn't be watching pornography even if there was no risk posed to one's mental health; which is irrelevant, for that is an entirely different topic 🙎🏼‍♀️

 

[rapinoes smirking revenge]

you keep saying you've provided studies but you haven't. you've provided news articles and podcasts that interpret studies and present what they say the outcomes of the studies are. and random quotes from articles that supposedly back up some of your claims. or bring up studies that have zero to do with the topic at hand.

 

[DontCostYaNuffin]

Indeed. Joe Rogan is a source of cancer inducing anabolic steroids, not an actual source. His podcasts are more detrimental to your health than being exposed to asbestos and having to deal with the likes of Aussie_Pride from Singles Chat on a day to day basis.

 

[babydolla]

you keep saying you've provided studies but you haven't. you've provided news articles and podcasts that interpret studies and present what they say the outcomes of the studies are. and random quotes from articles that supposedly back up some of your claims. or bring up studies that have zero to do with the topic at hand.

 

[Sean64]

It was never any government’s job to control what consenting adults do in their bedroom. No, it should not be illegal unless you’d like to move towards authoritarianism. What’s next? What more rights should we take away? I’m good on that. As a fully functioning adult you have the choice to not consume it and it’s your fault if you do and suffer the consequences. And parents should control what their kids are doing. Also if it was made illegal, people would still do it and it would become an industry full of crime, abuse, murder and theft. This is an obvious “No”, it should never be made illegal.

 

[rapinoes smirking revenge]

https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...ific-studies/96B11308710296966BF4B90EBA4F0DF2

i recommend reading this in a nice posh british accent to get the full effect. it's widely known everything sounds correct if said in a british accent.

 

[Deleted member 263960]

I agree, bias was shown.

seizing on a typo isnt the best argument

Oh come on - that’s even more weak than Dhamer.

I posted this : Consider this criminologist "Violent porn can be “a facilitator for one person, while having no effect on others," a 2017 Psychology Today article citing research by criminologist Eric Hickey states. "Still, the fact the certain serial murderers have insisted that pornography was a major factor in their killing young women and children cannot be ignored.'"

(ive added the underline and bold)

Dr. Eric Hickey is a senior core faculty member in Walden University’s Forensic Psychology doctoral program. His primary duties include serving on many dissertation committees, mentoring doctoral students, attending residencies, conducting forensic psychology Intensives, participating in webinars, and serving as an SME in program development.

He consults with private agencies and testifies as an expert witness in both criminal and civil cases involving sex crimes against children and adults, criminal paraphilia, stalking, homicide, domestic violence, offender psychology, victim-offender relationships, and serial crimes. Dr. Hickey assists local, state, and federal law enforcement in training and investigations as well as assisting in the review of cold case files.

His expertise is chronicled in over 50 television documentaries including appearances on History Channel, NPR, 20/20, A&E Bio, Oxygen, Reelz, GMA, CBC, TruTV, Discovery, TLC, Fox, Buzz Feed, and CNN. An international survey identified Dr. Hickey as one of the top 15 active forensic experts in the world.

 

[Deleted member 263960]

The poll question was clear, even if flawed, but since the goalposts are moving continually not point in continuing to go in circles.

 

[Inkandtatts]

seizing on a typo isnt the best argument

I didn’t know it was a typo, and this bit you edited in 20 minutes after your post made me think you were agreeing on the bias point

edit:
Ad hominem
This is a fallacy in which a claim is rejected on the basis of an aspect of someone's character, identity, motivations, or even the relationships they have with others.

Now you’ve confirmed it was a typo: they’re an anti-porn group. Of course it’s going to be biased. They’re hardly going to present studies that undermine their position. I think we agree on that.

Consider this criminologist "Violent porn can be “a facilitator for one person, while having no effect on others,"

I considered it and all that quote does is prove that it’s the personal characteristics of the offender that makes them offend - not the porn. Perhaps you could confirm what the definition of “violent porn” is in that quote because if the porn was already illegal in the first place it has no relevance at all to the debate

Guess what comes up when you search “violent porn” on PH. I’ve tarnished my browsing history for you:

View attachment 975054
View attachment 975055

"Still, the fact the certain serial murderers have insisted that pornography was a major factor in their killing young women and children cannot be ignored.'"

Just like the ones who say “god told me to do it” when murdering people. Perhaps God should he made illegal too, because the number of murderers that blamed God cannot be ignored. Or the ones who blame their victims for their crimes.

The poll question was clear, but since the goalposts are moving continually not point in continuing.

The only person that can move the goal posts is @babydolla and she hasn’t.

You've pivoted with your arguments in favour of making porn illegal. You went from a mild comment about violence and saying that porn encourages the abandonment of safe sex, to saying it should be illegal because it causes or partly contributed to murder, dismemberment, cannibalism, necrophilia and other nasty things - citing Dhamer and Bundy, to then citing a study on how 4 year olds behave when presented with toys.

I think everyone else has had a pretty consistent position

 

[rapinoes smirking revenge]

oh murderers have insisted they aren't to blame for the things they've done. well case closed i guess, you should have lead with this brilliant evidence.

 

[babydolla]

🤔

i think the desire for sex in general insights lusts for murdering ppl in perverse ways, but not porn specifically 💀

sex has been the inspiration behind violence for centuries, it's toppled entire nations; long before porn has ever existed, so violence isn't why porn is dangerous or harmful to the mind imo 🍵

...ppl that suffer from pornography addictions, i feel like, are more of a danger to themselves than they are other people which makes it particularly serious...

what makes pornography dangerous to the mind is how it can / will effect someone's mental health, & overall well being, as well the way it could effect the people within' the inflicted's life...

i think legally banning it would make ppl become more proactive, & sexually active in a healthier way 🤙🏼

Spoiler

p.s; adult / gay / sex chat's numbers would vastly decrease if porn was made illegal, so im starting to think some of u has a stake in the legality of pornography 🧐

 

[Inkandtatts]

what makes pornography dangerous to the mind is how it can / will effect someone's mental health, & overall well being, as well the way it could effect the people within' the inflicted's life;

I completely agree with this. People watching it can think they have to look a certain way, “perform” in a certain way, have the same effect on their partner that’s depicted in porn, and for men give the impression that the average size is more like a footlong than the reality which is half that.

I don’t think that should be a reason for banning it though and for me it goes back to education and where people learn about sex from. I do think life pre-internet must have been better in that respect.

 

[Sean64]

🤔

i think the desire for sex in general insights lusts for murdering ppl in perverse ways, but not porn specifically 💀

sex has been the inspiration behind violence for centuries, it's toppled entire nations; long before porn has ever existed, so violence isn't why porn is dangerous or harmful to the mind imo 🍵

...ppl that suffer from pornography addictions, i feel like, are more of a danger to themselves than they are other people which makes it particularly serious...

what makes pornography dangerous to the mind is how it can / will effect someone's mental health, & overall well being, as well the way it could effect the people within' the inflicted's life...

i think legally banning it would make ppl become more proactive, & sexually active in a healthier way 🤙🏼

Spoiler

p.s; adult / gay / sex chat's numbers would vastly decrease if porn was made illegal, so im starting to think some of u has a stake in the legality of pornography 🧐

Driving cars are dangerous. Should we ban that too? Should we ban hiking mountains because that’s dangerous too? What about potential books that cause people to think outside the mainstream? It’s a dangerous road. I think you’re vastly underestimating how huge the human trafficking problem would skyrocket because of this ridiculous idea. Legal porn is relatively safe for the people involved, but the second it becomes illegal, well I’d be terrified for the hundreds of thousands of adults and even worse that would be kidnapped and forced to make illegal videos. It’s the same thing with marijuana. Just because it was illegal didn’t stop hundreds of millions of smoking it. And it won’t stop people from watching pornography. Whatever harm comes from people with no self control watching porn is not even close compared to the severe dangers involved with making it illegal.

 

[rapinoes smirking revenge]

i'm all for banning hiking mountains. or walking in general.

 

[Inkandtatts]

walking in general.

Who is!?

Edit: sorry, misread what you posted

 

[Louize]

Can I just add I've seen softcore porn movies that are shown after watershed hours that are less explicit than some music videos played on TV before watershed hours.

Also, you're all talking about violence against women. Some women enjoy rough sex, you do realise that, yes? Consent is key. Being educated enough to talk openly about sex with any partner you have and the education around setting boundaries and safety is what stops it being percieved as violence and makes it pleasure.

Also there's a real correlation between porn LESSENING sexual violence.

According to the Justice Department’s authoritative National Crime Victimization Survey, since 1995, the U.S. sexual assault rate has fallen 44 percent

The argument is that in teenagers (mostly male teenagers) the sexual violence reports have gone up. Early access to porn and a lack of education is to blame for boys thinking it's an expectation that a woman enjoys being choked. Not the porn film depicting it because some women DO enjoy being choked. Educate our youth on consent and reality. I'm sure you can ****** the quote and find the source.

Nancy Friday wrote whole books of women discussing their very debased, debaucherous fantasies in 1973 right through to the early 90s (and that was before porn was as mainstream) proving that these fantasies were there before porn, even for women, and that we now just have a visual for those who want to see it. The below quote is from her 1973 book 'My Secret Garden'

There is something quite secret about My Secret Garden. All Friday’s interviewees, who talk about fantasies ranging from being sex workers to being urinated on, talk anonymously. One interviewee explains how, when she has sex with her husband, her fantasy is imagining “the bed practically torn apart and us ending up on the floor wet and sticky and happy”. The reality though is that, “All he’s really doing is lying on top of me and thrusting away

Back to violence and porn or sex work and take it even more historical...

What can be mentioned more sordid, more bereft of decency, or more full of turpitude than prostitutes, procurers, and the other pests of that sort? Remove prostitutes from human affairs, and you will unsettle everything because of lusts

386AD. Augaustine discusses prostitutes (let's assume female porn stars or women in porn in general are the equivalent, since HR has himself before called women on OF whores which some agreed with on here) and suggests they are in fact a necessary "evil" - which I guess is one way to view it... But he's basically suggesting that the sexual relief of men is paramount to them not being worse people... Thomas Aquinas also agrees with this notion in 'Summa Theologiae' for all you ones spouting religion.

... Isn't porn actually already just a safer, cheaper, more socially accepted version of visiting sex workers? Because prostitution is legal in many places, it is pimping and solicitation that isn't. And isn't prostitution one of the world's oldest professions?

I'll say it again. EDUCATION. IS. KEY.

 

[RomeoClitorizz]

Hi

 

[BlackLivesMatter]

i love gay twink pron

And in another thread you complain about being labeled as gay. If you are not gay then Ofir is straight.

 

[Inkandtatts]

14 Yes (14%) v 16 No (53%)

View attachment 974836

The Parliament of CA has spoken

Porn remains legal and so does Tom & Jerry

​

Update:

We're now at:

62% No it shouldn't be illegal
38% Yes it should be illegal

@Dumbasshoe1339 maybe you could give us some insight into why you think porn should be illegal?
View attachment 975107

 

[TheLeigh]

The only person that can move the goal posts is @babydolla and she hasn’t.

You mean it’s been being referenced incorrectly this entire time? 🤓 I had no idea.

sex has been the inspiration behind violence for centuries, it's toppled entire nations

America needs a break from toppling.

Guess we’ll have to ban sex now. 🥴

 

[babydolla]

You mean it’s been being referenced incorrectly this entire time? 🤓 I had no idea.

America needs a break from toppling.

Guess we’ll have to ban sex now. 🥴

yeah, i agree it wasnt covid that crashed the economy…

it was all the pu$$y being grabbed 🤌🏻

 

[American Badger]

I agree with Sean64, My fear is the fact that when you lose a "right" its next to impossible to get back. Banning anything should be a last ditch effort to solve a problem in society.

 

[Kiniavelly]

I think it depends a lot on the content and how it's made. Consensual stuff between adults should be legal, but anything involving harm or exploitation shouldn’t be allowed at all.

 

[Kiniavelly]

A lot of people forget that adults have different limits and needs, and what works for one might not for another. I use sex vn for personal exploration in a way that feels safer and more comfortable than watching mainstream content. It's easier to find stories that reflect what I'm into emotionally, not just visually, and that makes a big difference for me.

 

[Mr.W]

Babydolla been killing it with her responses.

I had to vote no, only because the question was too broad.

I think US Government has the right to regulate the industry heavily and it should, and the industry should not be protected under the Constitutions' Freedom of Speech in a free for all manner, considering, one can not in a court of law freely curse at a judge, or freely talk out of turn in government functions, so on and so forth.

The industry does not care about child safety and it should at a minimum to make sure children under 18 can not access their websites simply by clicking " I am over 18 " . children under 18 in the USA can not buy cigarrettes with out ID, and most states have a law regarding booze and a lil sign that usually reads, we ID anyone that LOOKS UNDER 21. You cant even join the military if you are under 18 ( in most cases ) ya have to register to vote, you have to get a license to drive a permit to fly a plane, permits to buy guns forms to fill out at a minimum to buy a gun that those in turn go through a background check. supposedly.

Yet the Porn industry is just a straight up free for all for accessing. With a few states implementing a useless law that prevents ease of access online, that is easily circumvented with a VPN. but at least those states are trying.

Anyone enjoys watching Chris Hansen knows he tells perps, children lie to get on those dating sites.

So exactly how does clicking " im over 18 " legally mean jack?

If one can simply click something and it is legally binding which for some reason is okay at times when making purchases that have auto renewal options. then to me there is no need to do any more legally than ask someone if they are legal in person when buying booze, guns, etc.

South Park had that one episode, you clicked accept, so we can do this to you.

Sadly it isn't all the porn industrys fault, that responsibilty ultimately falls on the American Voter to give two rats balls enough to demand the government fix an industry that is easily accessible to children online.