South Africa Flag logo

South African Skeptics

October 23, 2019, 09:17:15 AM
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
Go to mobile page.
News: Follow saskeptics on twitter.
   
   Skeptic Forum Board Index   Help Forum Rules Search GoogleTagged Login Register Chat Blogroll  
Pages: [1] 2 3  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic:

Porn as the Evil

 (Read 13209 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
GCG
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +8/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 1829


skeptical mantis is skeptical


adele horn
WWW
« on: July 29, 2010, 15:35:38 PM »

I have, following a completely arb chain of links from Wikileaks, and ended up on a page, that pretty much says the following,
and a whole schpiel of other argument, for and against porn.
i have never really thought all that hard about it.
* porn causes child abuse
* porn causes infidelity
* kids get harmed by watching porn
* sexual trafficing and porn goes hand-in-hand
* could porn prevent rape
* etc, etc.

views?

Logged
Michael Meadon
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +1/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 121



michaelmeadon
WWW
« Reply #1 on: July 29, 2010, 15:58:07 PM »

I've read only bits of the formal literature but, AFAIK and IIRC, none of these claims stand up to scrutiny.

(It does seem to be true, though, that pedophiles uses child porn to groom victims. But I take it this ISN'T what we're talking about -- all sane people agree child porn should be illegal whether or not it helps pedophiles with grooming).
Logged
GCG
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +8/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 1829


skeptical mantis is skeptical


adele horn
WWW
« Reply #2 on: July 29, 2010, 16:20:16 PM »

a tidbit i had researched a while back.
they claim homosexuals are the main culprits of child molestation.  when a study was done, it turned out less than 1% of gay men had any pedophillic tendancies.  so much for that woo claim.

in my opinion, i think that kids were exposed to more sexual behaviour before the advent of tv/internet.
back in the day, mom and dad would be at it right next door to timmy.  12 kids in a four bedroom house.
watching the farm hands get it on in the field/barn.
i think we underestimate how resourcefull kids are to find smut.  without the benefit of tv, phones or internet.
i do, however, have a problem with popular tv shows making teen-sex out to be cool and something to aspire to.
there is a show on, gossip girl.  the girls have agendas to seduce the guys, the guys try to get laid and drunk as often as possible.  15 year olds move out of their parents houses to pursue a career in fashion design.  and they are all still in school.  if the characters were out of school, employed,etc, i might not have such a huge problem with them going at it like rabbits.
given, that untill like 50 years ago, kids got married at like 16 years old.  but we are supposed to keep them in school, with their heads in the books, in the crack houses.
Logged
Brian
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +8/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 1367


I think therefor I am, I think


« Reply #3 on: July 29, 2010, 16:52:26 PM »

I have, following a completely arb chain of links from Wikileaks, and ended up on a page, that pretty much says the following,
and a whole schpiel of other argument, for and against porn.
i have never really thought all that hard about it.
* porn causes child abuse
* porn causes infidelity
* kids get harmed by watching porn
* sexual trafficing and porn goes hand-in-hand
* could porn prevent rape
* etc, etc.

views?
It reminds me somewhat of the time when the apartheid bosses stated that big families cause poverty...the opposite has been shown to the case in general terms.
In answer to your question GCG, will child abuse, infidelity, sexual traficking, rape be diminished if porn was unavailable? I doubt it....it may go underground more though.

In my young years we had no TV, no Playboy, nutting... censorship was strict, blacks were not allowed to have sex with whites etc but it still happened and vice versa etc...it was our biggest ambition just to get to see a f.nny, let alone experience one with tactile and visual senses!@!
Logged
GCG
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +8/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 1829


skeptical mantis is skeptical


adele horn
WWW
« Reply #4 on: July 29, 2010, 17:17:49 PM »

that's what i thought.  i think, the only thing thats making the whole situation seem out of hand, is that kids have zero respect for elders anymoe.  they get away with murder.  so parents have to sit back and watch them self-destruct.
Logged
BoogieMonster
NP complete
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 3095



« Reply #5 on: July 29, 2010, 17:43:30 PM »

Quote


Say goodbye to your porn sites people. Uncle Zuma has come to protect you!

And I quote
Quote from: news24
"Despite recent amendments of the law and other efforts to stop the devastating effect on children of their access to pornography, it's not enough," FPB legal affairs manager Dumisani Rorwana said in a statement on Thursday.


DEVASTATING!? Really? I mean when I was a kid we found the odd magazine and leered joyously at it. Can't say my life has been devastated by it. I'd like to know exactly how a child gets "devastated" by just seeing some titties? They may see some weird stuff but I'm sure they can deal with it better than Mr. Rorwana thinks.

So, what the hell does one do in the face of such a move by govt? Just sit back and let our "free" country become responsible for checking on our naughty habits without our consent?

Child Porn, now this IS a contentious one for me, and one that lands me in hot water frequently because I argue there's grey area.... On one hand you have to go "OK, pedo's running around taking naked pics of kids is a bad thing", that is very clear. On the other, how many people have nekkid pics of their infants in the bathtub, exactly? Are all those people a danger to society that must be locked up? Do they pose a danger to anyone whatsoever? Technically they ARE in violation of the law. Must we sensor artistic statements in that persuit too? See album covers for: "Blind Faith" and "Virgin Killer", I won't them link here, and beware he who searches for them. There was also a case, that I can't find right now, of a pro photographer taking a snap of her infant daughter running around without clothes, that got her into huge shit. The question is, is there a line, or is ALL of this off limits? I think the answer isn't completely clear. (Feel free to flame me, it is just a thought) - afterthought: How does a nudist then take holiday snaps, exactly?

This is all because the content of the photo is not necessarily malicious. It's the context the photo was taken in that poses the problem. I won't deny this makes it nigh-on-impossible to regulate, and is problematic.

Logged
Peter Grant
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +5/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 845


a fully caused agent


AtheistStoned AtheistStoned
WWW
« Reply #6 on: July 29, 2010, 18:28:30 PM »

Typical:

Quote
"The lack of statistics about child pornography should not lead us to be complacent in protecting children," deputy home affairs minister Malusi Gigaba said in a statement following a meeting on Monday to discuss the matter.
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/Politics/Govt-to-fight-child-porn-20090901


Then do the research, get more statistics! Don't pass laws based on assumptions, wait until you have more data.

By making pornography in general illegal you just force it underground, this will make research even more difficult.
Logged
Mefiante
Defollyant Iconoclast
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +61/-9
Offline Offline

Posts: 3753


In solidarity with rwenzori: Κοπρος φανεται


WWW
« Reply #7 on: July 29, 2010, 21:09:09 PM »

DEVASTATING!? Really? I mean when I was a kid we found the odd magazine and leered joyously at it. Can't say my life has been devastated by it.
But… but… but you became a sceptic! Wink

'Luthon64
Logged
Faerie
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +10/-2
Offline Offline

Posts: 2113



« Reply #8 on: July 30, 2010, 08:35:51 AM »

Ah hell, straightforward porn has its uses. And pedo's will go about their urges regardless of the availability of porn.

I have absolutely no problem with it, in fact, it can be healthy for a teenager to be exposed to it (taking into account the emotional maturity of said teen), their hormones are up the sky anyway, let them lock themselves in their bedrooms and do whatever comes naturally - beats them going to experiment with the local matress at school.

Infidelity will happen if one or the other partner are'nt happy, porn are rarely (if ever) the true issue here. Of-course, the good xtian wife will cite it as the reason for her marriage' collapse, but at the same time, she's probably not looking in the mirror at herself either. I sympathise with the man in these cases.
Logged
GCG
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +8/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 1829


skeptical mantis is skeptical


adele horn
WWW
« Reply #9 on: July 30, 2010, 09:38:55 AM »

Boogie,
i think taking pics of your kids being nekkid is cool.  if you keep it in an album at home for you own perusal.  once you stick it on facebook, its public property,  pedos can copy it, stick it into their own collection, and leer to heart's content.
parents, and people in general, me included, have fallen into the trap of posting a pic you think is for you friends/boyfriend, then it gets copied and pasted, and before you know it, you boyfriend's co-workers posts it on the pinboard.
the internet is about as watertight as fishnet stockings.  i see girls posting half naked pics, and i cringe, coz every one of their 480 friends, of whom they personally know like maybe 52, can see that.  they can see where they live, where they go to school, where they hang out, who their friends are.  it's so insanely easy to find and stalk someone via the net.
so if a parent is going to post a naked pic of their kid on the web, or mail it to someone, they better know that somewhere along the line, the viewership is going to pass from 'aw cute' to 'i want that'.
Logged
BoogieMonster
NP complete
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +19/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 3095



« Reply #10 on: July 30, 2010, 09:59:29 AM »

Quote
i think taking pics of your kids being nekkid is cool.  if you keep it in an album at home for you own perusal

My point is that is also illegal, technically.
Logged
Faerie
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +10/-2
Offline Offline

Posts: 2113



« Reply #11 on: July 30, 2010, 10:07:06 AM »

Quote
i think taking pics of your kids being nekkid is cool.  if you keep it in an album at home for you own perusal

My point is that is also illegal, technically.

Its dodgy, I found (tasteful?Huh?) black and white pictures of myself in a tin skottel bathtub posing for my dad, I estimate myself being around 3 years old or so. I dont remember it from squat, but he must have guided my poses as it is rather suggestive, I was disgusted and horrified and when showing my mom she "remembers it vaguely" and it was all "innocent" - personally, I'm not so sure and after finding the pics I stopped looking at my dad as a dad, but rather saw him as a dodgy old man instead, loss of innocence perhaps? Its a very slippery slope, taking a pic of your naked kid running through a sprayer with a garden hose in hand is one thing, having them pose is something else altogether......
Logged
Jane of the Jungle
Full Member
***

Skeptical ability: +4/-0
Offline Offline

Posts: 235



« Reply #12 on: July 30, 2010, 11:09:37 AM »

....and after finding the pics I stopped looking at my dad as a dad, but rather saw him as a dodgy old man instead, loss of innocence perhaps? Its a very slippery slope, taking a pic of your naked kid running through a sprayer with a garden hose in hand is one thing, having them pose is something else altogether......

Yeah I can imagine what runs through one’s mind seeing pics like that! Keep in mind that our parent (although not all of them are/were innocent), mostly saw the world and everything different than we do.  I sometimes feel they didn’t protect us from harm, in the way we’re doing now, just because they were so gullible in believing nothing would ever go wrong if their sky daddy is watching over us! Wtf if they only knew!   In our eyes they’ve done stupid things, but then again, our kids might feel the same one day! Undecided
Logged
GCG
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +8/-4
Offline Offline

Posts: 1829


skeptical mantis is skeptical


adele horn
WWW
« Reply #13 on: July 30, 2010, 12:30:24 PM »

do people still let their little girl run around on the beach without tops on?  i remember cruising around bare-chested when i was tiny.
i have allso checked people having both little boys and girls cruising around nekkid on the beach.  or taking a leak.  while i think nothing of it, a pedo will be brimming with joy.
i think its sad that we have to hide our kids from freaks, but such is life.  its even sadder when parents dont protect their kids, from other people, or themselves for that matter.
my sister suggested i was molested by my dad, but i cant remember.  dont want to either.  i remember waking up one night without my jammies on.  but you do strange stuff when you are asleep.
arent there allso a movie about a woman whose kids got taken away coz someone took fodies of the kids jolling together nekkid, and somehow the cops got hold of it or something?
Logged
Brian
Hero Member
*****

Skeptical ability: +8/-1
Offline Offline

Posts: 1367


I think therefor I am, I think


« Reply #14 on: July 30, 2010, 13:13:29 PM »

I knew IT!!!
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  All   Go Up
  Print  


 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Page created in 0.432 seconds with 24 sceptic queries.
Google visited last this page May 06, 2019, 02:38:47 AM
Privacy Policy