I wrote to John Howards government quite a few times on the porn/sex crime connection and all I got back was a graph or a discussion on the degrees of censorship.
It was such a HUGE! cop-out.
Why is no one looking into the connection between the two?
Is there a study going on?
What do think tanks do if they dont look into social distress?
Victims of rape and molestation will know where the trouble lies. Will Kevin Rudd take up the call for an indepth investigation?
Would you like to tell us what your vision of the world of the tomorrow regards pornography is?
I think its important that a data collection begin...somewhere, anywhere.

because what you're saying is horseshit. there is nothing wrong with pornography. at all.

Well said Steel.

There are reports, plenty of them. They just don't say what you want to hear, Gibo, and that is that porn is pretty harmless.

But you don't want to be told you're just plain wrong. So you ask, where's the studies?

Did you even read the most recent OLO porn article? The opening paragraph is:

"Subsidised by the Howard Government’s Australia Research Council, “senior academic researchers” Katherine Albury, Alan McKee and Catharine Lumby embarked on the “Understanding Pornography in Australia” research project, and The Porn Book is the result of their findings."

And the author of the OLO article, Ms Gambotto Burke, didn't like what she was hearing either, so she worked up some indignation and pumped out a few hundred words of anti-porn polemic, with no real facts to back her case, just a series of emotive anecdotes and phrases.

So yes Gibo, there are studies. They just say what the rest of us know - porn isn't the evil conservatives pretend it is.

But of course, I don't expect studies or things like practicality or common sense to get in the way of a good self-righteous rant on the sinfulness of porn or even non-marital sex, or heaven forbid, homosexuality.

I posted this link on the other thread

http://www.porn-report.com/402-performers-in-pornography.htm

Nature of the Evidence

"Caution is dictated, too, because there have been to our knowledge almost no "scientific" investigations into the background of participants in pornography or its effects on them afterwards.[965] Such investigations would certainly be extremely difficult-perhaps impossible-to design and conduct given the clandestine character of the pornography industry. Reliable conclusions about the number and characteristics of performers in pornography will likely remain as difficult to reach as, for example, solid estimates of the number and characteristics of illegal aliens.[966]"

conclusions

"The approach we propose in this area is a cautious but urgent one. Caution we believe to be required from the incomplete character of the evidence currently available. Urgency, however, arises from the extremely serious nature of the harms apparently being inflicted on many young and vulnerable people. Both of these interests will be best served, we believe, if federal and state governments initiate thorough investigations-by agencies or committees possessed of substantial resources and full subpoena powers-of the use of "models." "

If you want more, read the whole thing yourselves.

Basically, one should not legislate for something based on anecdotal hunches or emotional knee-jerks, it tends to give the impression that government is messing people around for the sake of it, which rightly, hinders their re-electability.

Gibo, the link to australian research has already been discussed.

Particularly telling is research in the USA which provides very strong circumstantial evidence showing that access to porn reduces rates of sexual assaults.

If the research is accurate the anti-porn lobby is in effect supporting a stance which increases the risk of sexual violence in society.

Todd Kendall's paper
http://www.toddkendall.net/internetcrime.pdf

Some summary articles
http://www.slate.com/id/2152487/
http://www.reason.com/news/show/123330.html

http://libertus.net/censor/studies2.html#GovInq

Some material on violence in the media and it's impacts
http://libertus.net/censor/studies.html

R0bert

This endless hand-wringing about porn is quite interesting, isn't it?

Personally, I mostly find porn pretty boring, and I'm not at all interested in the violent and gross stuff. However, as long as everybody involved in making and watching it are consenting adults I really can't see any great problem with it.

I find myself in general agreement on this issue with several with whom I often disagree - mostly because I think we all share a passion for freedom of speech and expression. And that's a good thing, I think.

People who don't like pornography and erotica shouldn't look at it, nor participate in its production. Of course they're entitled to voice their disapproval, but it is quite tiresome to those of us with broader minds than theirs.

CJ: "I find myself in general agreement on this issue with several with whom I often disagree - mostly because I think we all share a passion for freedom of speech and expression. And that's a good thing, I think."

Funny you should say that I find the same thing on OLO at times. Just shows how diverse and interesting people are and that even between very different people there can be more to unite us than divide us.

I respect your posts on OLO but I have to disagree with your comment that someone who is anti-porn is not necessarily broadminded. There are many reasons why someone might take this view (particuarly violent porn) other than strong religious beliefs and still be advocates of free speech.

As a relatively new poster here, I find that most of the 'tempers' or passions arise usually from miscommunication. The difficult part is we don't have the benefit of the 'whole picture' in that we cannot see body language or facial expressions only words on a screen. :)

PORNOGRAPHY IS BAD.. EVIL..IMMORAL destructive.. and degenerate!

Steel.. remind me to interpret all your other posts in the light of your last one...

Porn is 'food' for the depraved. True 'porn' has a satanic element quite apart from the factual side of 'people doing sexual things to each other'.

Perhaps this is spiritually discerned rather than being so obvious it smacks you in the face.

DEGENERATE..... it reduces human sexuality to the animal, promotes the utterly selfish nature of such interaction.

EVIL... because it draws people into an attitude mind set which is destructive to well rounded relationships. It also spits in the face of God and His creative mandate to humans.

BAD... because it objectifies humans.

DESTRUCTIVE because it promotes values which are not compatible with healthy family life and human relationships.

IMMORAL. Because it flies in the face of 'morality' established by God for the well being of people and their families.

Now..in all that little 'rant' there are:

a) Some subjective assesments.
b) Some assessments based on a Christ centred view of life.

I admit this...I confess.. guilty as charged.

To me, its as clear as the bruise on my stomach from the motorized post hole digger which locked up at the bottom and hit me so hard in the gut that the bruise is an intense purple. So there is PLENTY wrong with porn. If there was not... it would have a different name.

If we have to wait for a 'federal government study'..to discover the above, we will be waiting for a longggg time.

Why not simply 'repent'.... now that would be novel.

Excellent BOAZ_David.
I stand entirely with you in your response.
I knew porn at an early age in the 60's, what kid didnt, when it was nothing special and had an opportunity to watch it grow, along with the sex crime it created.
In the early 60's, times were pretty quiet.
There were no murders much (the Graham Thorne case being the biggest event). There were few recorded (media) sex offences then a huge flood of filth hit society in the 70's.
Sex crime leaped...and kept on leaping.
All of us baby boomers observed it including all of the now older policticans.
So we knew the cause.
The John Howards knew it. They all knew!
The problem was the politicians wanted their jobs more than tackle the problem.
Porn became more intense, as time clicked over, until we have today (2008) the situation where rapes are everywhere. Child rapes, adult rapes, granny rapes.
If you younger guys want to sit around all day and play with yourselves in front of photos of naked women thats your problem...but dont tell me, an observer of the sex crime/porn connection, that it doesnt harm society.
Its killing people.
I reckon there wouldnt be one of you porn-ites that could walk along a street anywhere and not strip every single woman you come across naked in your mind for the sake of your carnal, fallen lusts.
One step further...is reaching out and grabbing. Add the alcohol and the dugs as many porn-ites will do and thats exactly what happens. Theres nothing noble or honorable in being a porn practicer.

Right.

Boaz, here's the thing. Our society is secular. That means, we don't all buy into the deities worshipped by you and Gibo.

So for starters, your immorality argument: "flies in the face of morality established by god" means absolutely nothing to me, and I'm somewhat annoyed you project that onto others.

Boaz, I know you'll disagree because of the way your world view is shaped, but I'll say it anyway - your god has no authority here.

What's more, in a secular society, this is the way it has to be.

As for the rest of the reasons, there's no backing there. Your 'destructive' argument is a fallacy. You don't prove it's destructive at all.

Objectifies humans? How's that different to any other form of modelling?

Your 'evil' rant, is just the destructive rant, bundled up with the morality rant. It's a repeat.

The 'degenerate' argument is very similar to the 'bad' one.

So, to translate your entire rant to a more simple translation:

It's bad because it's bad because god says it's bad.

You'll forgive me if I prefer to rely on the actual studies, and refuse to kowtow to a godbotherer censorship lobby.

This must be the Adam and eve forbidden apple teachings?.....BOAZ you realise I hope that people like you in the 19th century and earlier believed a woman's skin to be pornographic. That is, anything above the ankle. By their standards you are as evil as you describe, and so is every christian on the planet. Not only that, but I believe the vast majority of christians in this respect are hypocrites (if they hold the same values as you, which i believe they don't). You are christian extremists.

I guess at least you have the presence of mind to admit that your view is a religious and subjective. The human body and sex are natural. You need to crawl out from under the rocks you are living, or are you walking out in the open amongst us? If you are, you must have your eyes shut and sealed since even at beaches some women are topless.

http://www.sexinchrist.com/pornography.html

Gibo and Boaz help is at hand ;-)
No apologies for double entendre.

But I found this wonderful link discussing the issues Christians have with pornography.

To OLO censorship BigBrother, this is a legitimate site, please don’t delete as being “unnecessary”.

Thank you

David BOAZ and Gibo

This is not the perfect dataset to work with but it is what I could get off the net. I looked first for local Austrlaian data but could find little (none) which went back before 1996

USA rates of forcible rape per 100,000 of population by year
per the US Dept of Justice Statistical database

Year United States-Total
________________________________________
1960 9.6
1961 9.4
1962 9.4
1963 9.4
1964 11.2
1965 12.1
1966 13.2
1967 14.0
1968 15.9
1969 18.5
1970 18.7
1971 20.5
1972 22.5
1973 24.5
1974 26.2
1975 26.3
1976 26.6
1977 29.4
1978 31.0
1979 34.7
1980 36.8
1981 36.0
1982 34.0
1983 33.7
1984 35.7
1985 37.1
1986 37.9
1987 37.4
1988 37.6
1989 38.1
1990 41.2
1991 42.3
1992 42.8
1993 41.1
1994 39.3
1995 37.1
1996 36.3
1997 35.9
1998 34.5
1999 32.8
2000 32.0
2001 31.8
2002 33.1
2003 32.3
2004 32.4
2005 31.7
2006 30.9

Following a peak in 1993, the rate has been progressively declining.

Whilst your observation that the incidence is higher than in 1960 this might be due to several factors

Including

Reporting of offence, the social values have changed in the past 50 years, the stigma of rape has reduced which would encourage more reporting.

Rape as a consequence or in conjunction with other crime.

The influence of drugs on offenders.

Regarding specific studies into pornography:

There is little to find of a real test, most of it is anecdotal, however this link

http://repositories.cdlib.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=commstudies

will take you to a controlled test.

My paraphrasing of the conclusions: “no effect” between exposure to pornography and the desire to engage is a sexual assault.

A Danish study, across four countries, suggests the rate of assault declined after Pornography was legalized.

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/proceedings/14/kutchinsky.pdf

Rant all you want but as TLTR says "You'll forgive me if I prefer to rely on the actual studies, and refuse to kowtow to a godbotherer censorship lobby."

The usual defenders of their own rights to perversion despite the degradation to humanity and the sexual abuse to children. The depravity of the heart of man is clearly spoken of in the Scriptures. Most of these posters are clear evidence of this. Thankfully many still are not blinded to the obvious fruit of perversion (pornography). It is no wonde r that Islam is growing at such a rate when the perverts start to not even be ashamed of their own bondage.

At some stage it will click that porn has to be dealt with.
My suggestion would be for all police CIR forms (crime investigation forms) to have a little square on them to be ticked when porn was found at an offenders premises...not just sex offenders.
That way we can collect data and also hit them hard with extra penalties for having the material around to encourage possible sex crime. Which it does.
I do see a future coming where porn is banned for the good of the communities and offenders are heavily penalised for owning it. We wont stop the rapes any other way.

Tell me Gibo -

Kindly inform us as to why we should believe you, when you give no backing as to why.

You say it "encourages possible sex crime."

I call, "bulldust."

This is the part where you explain what proof you have, and explain how it is different to say, action movies encouraging gunfights.

If you can't explain the difference, I can only assume that you either think sex is worse than violence and people being killed, or you don't think adults can think for themselves.

As it stands, I just see you and boaz_david just spouting biblically infused opinions.

AND...it would be handy to have a national witchcraft dob in telelphone line/website to round up those that open their hearts to demon powers and get involved in abomination. If you know someone into the "dark communications"...dob them into detectives, even anonomously.
We mustnt let the kids get drawn into the cycle of witchcraft/sexual perversion/porn/and abomination.
If your children are goofing off with Harry Potter you really ought to stop it immediately lest they open a door and end up with more than a few problems.

AAAH.. COL.... well done mate on those stats.. such things are always good to fill in the gaps of our knowledge.. one of the great parts of a forum... (see below for a reference to such information)

TRTL... lets not be under any illusions. I absolutely know... that you do not bend ur knee to the God of the bible.. because you have told us so many times.

This is not the issue for me.

I (and others) am here, in a way 'prophetically' (let's see what Pericles and CJ do with 'that':).. prophets never were about 'popularity contests'..nor did their message depend on the degree of likely acceptance by the targets of Gods Word to them.
Any Christian can speak 'prophetically' in the 'general' sense shown in the Old Testament (and sometimes in the new), (though the OT prophets often had a specific word from God, for a specific time and people). It was always about:

-Calling the community back to God.
-A Timely warning about the consequences of sinful behavior.
-Sometimes specifically predictive about what kind of consequences will occur.
-Obedience to the Grace and Patience of God, in communicating His will and standards to a recalcitrant community.

It does not depend on 'surveys'... 'research'... 'studies'...it depends on ONE thing..and one thing alone.. "The Word..of God".
By that, I mean the moral standard set up by God in the Old Testament as reflected in the Law of Moses.

The important thing for you... is that because we speak in the spirit of the prophets..we don't say "Shape up or WE will ship you off to the Gulag" no no no... we say "This is what God has laid down.. depart from it at your own risk".

There is the added element though.. that departing this world in a state of unrepented sin, will have eternal consequences. We all have 'choice'...until our last breath, then..its game over.
People will then see if it was just 'our belief' or.. reality.

Fractelle.... that site was.. *creepy* :)

I'll support that Gibo, it's a fantastic idea - provided people ringing it have to identify themselves to the detectives.

To prevent crank calls, naturally.

It would also help if the people making use of this witchcraft line, could inform the detectives at the other end as to what actions they personally have taken to combat witchcraft and whether there was violence involved.

Oh, and their current location, and whether they're on any medication - particularly any that could interfere with sedatives.

I forgot, the link to the US Dept of Justice Statistics

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/

runner, that your post is a continuous ad hominem attack simply means you have nothing to offer or to contribute to the debate.

Gibo “do see a future coming where porn is banned for the good of the communities and offenders are heavily penalised for owning it. We wont stop the rapes any other way.”

The statistics and objective analysis suggest banning porn will make no difference to the incidence of rape.

Indeed the http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/proceedings/14/kutchinsky.pdf

report might imply a ban might well increase the incidence of rape (simple logic, if removing a ban reduces the incidence of event, reinstalling a ban will increase the incidence of an event).

The other obvious point which you totally ignore in your assertion is this

Pornography, even if it were a contributory factor to rape, which it clearly is not, is not the only or exclusive factor.

Unless you address all the issues

To find out the causal influences on crime is difficult , using the key words “sex crime causes” produced the following

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4463713 has “causes of sex crimes in adolescence” but it is written in German.

http://www.aardvarc.org/rape/about/whowhy.shtml makes a good attempt and notably does not mention “pornography” among the causes

An Australian paper http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/cjb54.pdf/$file/cjb54.pdf

Concluded “Because crime is not the result of any single factor or combination of factors, it makes no sense to seek to control crime by any single strategy or set of strategies. A mix of strategies will always be appropriate. The emphasis on particular strategies should vary according to the nature of the crime
problem at hand, the available options for influencing the problem and the urgency with which change is required. Governments anxious to maximise their control over crime are better off trying to influence as many factors as possible, rather than concentrating all their efforts on one or two factors..”

Since viewing pornography has been tested and found not to be a cause of sexual assault, banning it is not going to reduce the incidence of rape or other sexual assaults

Boaz

The christian porn site was both 'creepy' and hilarious, but seems like you needed to know what your brethren are up to - so to speak.

But thanks for taking a peek...

:-D

I dont really trust statistics.
Some years ago we had a christian boarder from the banking world and he had a laugh at stats saying that you can use stats to manipulate anything you want. You can make them do anything the heart desires.
I really believe he was right.
The committed christian view is that manipulation in any form is witchcraft because its not based on truth and is designed to meet the manipulaters requirements in the areas of greed and lust.
Sorry.
I dont trust stats.
Make a good thread though wouldnt it?
"STATS! millions wasted each year on false data" etc

A week or two ago, our local paper ran a long article about the Porn report. We are in a rural area, and our paper is generally regarded as a family read. This was on a Saturday, so that is especially so then.
I am amazed that people can swallow the lie that porn is harmless when we should all know by now, the effects it has had on the communities in the North of Australia. Certainly, most of them are aboriginal, but dont think that it can not come over ethnic lines , or socio economic lines. It generally regards women as meat. Lets be frank. Women and girls and children deserve much better. Good on you for posting a critic of it!
Jenny

Ah Gibo, the endless Christian concern about sex. No wonder the
Muslims are gaining on you in numbers. At least they accept the
joys of sex, but are just paranoid that somebody might be knocking
off their wives.

Get used to it, that erection that you occasionaly have or wake up
with is normal and natural. Enjoy it, rather then call it evil.

No wonder that thinking people have left the Christian church in
droves and the pews are nearly empty on Sundays!

The real problem is the religious not accepting that sex is normal
and natural, so out of the Christian Church, we have a string of
perverts emerging, who are regularly taken to court. BD is a worry
he constantly mentions it, so clearly its on his mind a great deal :)

The bible sums it up accurately
'(Romans 1:28) And even as they did not think fit to have God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do the things not right,'

The heart of man can only be free from depravity in Christ. Again the supporters of pornography prove this graphically.

Clearly the bible got it wrong runner, for the heart of man does
little but pump blood. Perhaps it is time that you learned a bit
about science :)

Of course the churches try to harness the sex drive. It is one of the principle drivers and motivators of men and women.

Why is porn so popular? Because it is about sex and “naughty bits”.

The theocracy of Christianity is all about absolute power and social control. It is simple.
No one to terrorise with the inquisition.
No one to excommunicate for heresay or transgressions

Most important

No congregants, no one to pay for the parasite priest.

I have no doubt there is a God.

I am equally convinced, he is appalled from the way he is represented by the “bigots with the bible”.

Boaz, Gibo, runner and anyone else who wants to quote scripture, whilst denying objective research, you might like to preach at me but it don’t mean I am listening.

You might choose to deny the objective statistical studies which I submit (note, I try to use government or professional organization websites for most references, rather than risk reputation on private rant-sites).

If you do not like statistics Gibo, produce some alternative evidence to challenge the result.

Simply saying “I don’t believe in statistics” is a cop out, which diminishes your credibility.

Crimes and abuses perpetrated against people, children included, by Christian priests, instead of being exposed, in the pursuit of truth, morality and the name of God; were covered up, spreading and entrenching corruption deeper and further through the priesthood and Christian leadership organization, I am amazed anyone dares admit their Christian faith anymore.

BOAZ “Why not simply 'repent'.... now that would be novel.”

Nothing to repent, what goes on between consenting adults stays with those adults not the local bigot priest

Gibo “Porn became more intense, as time clicked over, until we have today (2008) the situation where rapes are everywhere. Child rapes, adult rapes, granny rapes.”

So prove how porn has been the “sole” contributing factor in one rape and not the result of the other influences (per my earlier post) and I can possibly attribute 10 for every one, to the excesses of the Christian priesthood (and BOAZ, they are creepy too).

Dear Gibo,

The three-year study that began in 2003 (partly funded by the Federal Government) called, "Understanding Pornography in Australia," had over 320 survey responses online. Over 2,000 surveys were to be collected by the completion of the project.

The study was done - to provide information on pornography in Australia that will help shape public policy on the topic.

While we're on this subject however ...

I wonder if "Lady Chatterley's Lover," and "Women In Love" and "Emmanuelle"
and "Last Tango In Paris," classify as pornography?

Why?

They're movies I thoroughly enjoyed!

Not possible, Col.

>>If you do not like statistics Gibo, produce some alternative evidence to challenge the result. Simply saying “I don’t believe in statistics” is a cop out, which diminishes your credibility.<<

Sorry. You cannot "diminish" below zero.

I havent really trusted stats or for that matter governments since I worked in them.
I remember Phillip Arantz, of the NSW Police Force in the early 70's, exposing bodgie statistcs re: NSW crime clear up rates and getting taken away to a psychiatric institution and subsquently sacked.
I really dont care all that much how good a name an institution has whether it be Australian or US or anyone else when it comes to the truth. Mankind is fallen from relationship with God and will adjust whatever he chooses to suit his sin.
*The problem COL ROUGE in finding an incident connecting a sex crime to porn is hampered much by governments and their police forces who ignore the connection between the rape encouraging porn and the actual incidents; and refuse to collect information on the cases. Cops aint dumb... they know what offenders look at. Ivan Milat would have fed his heart a mountain of porn prior to the Backpacker Murders. Cops knew this.
A guy your age should likewise be intelligent enough to know from life experience what men do...or have you been a monk locked away from it all?

Gibo start this discussion with the following comment

"I wrote to John Howards government quite a few times on the porn/sex crime connection and all I got back was a graph or a discussion on the degrees of censorship.
It was such a HUGE! cop-out.
Why is no one looking into the connection between the two?
Is there a study going on? "

And now he tells us "I havent really trusted stats or for that matter governments since I worked in them."

So just what was Gibo asking the government to do?
Maybe assume a connection between porn and sex crime, maybe make up some stats to suit and use that to drive an ideology driven crackdown on porn. Gibo has clearly rejected "evidence" so it seems reasonable to assume that he did not really want the government looking into the issue, Gibo wanted action based on his beliefs and assumptions.

Gibo also tells us "The committed christian view is that manipulation in any form is witchcraft because its not based on truth and is designed to meet the manipulaters requirements in the areas of greed and lust."

Looks like Gibo better check for a wart on his nose and a pointy hat because when you combine his views on stats on this his calls to the government it looks like manipulation which is apparently witchcraft.

R0bert

Damn well said, R0bert.

Gibo, if you're going to ask for studies, don't ignore them when the findings don't jibe with what you want to hear.

Essentially, here in this thread, you've admitted that you won't listen to reason if it contradicts what you already believe.

Given that you believe in many just plain ridiculous things that people with common sense don't subscribe to, I suppose it's no wonder.

By all means, continue spouting your wild theories.
That's the beauty of a free society that allows people to say - or show - things you may disagree with, such as porn.

Ironically, it's this freedom which lets you go wild with your bizarre demon prophecy and porn theories.

But don't go asking for proof then shut your eyes and ears when it proves you wrong.

COL... you must have had a 'bad priest' experience at a young and impressionable age mate...

Your focus seems to be 2fold.

1/ "Priests"
2/ "Christian Theocracy"... social control etc.

I'm glad you responded that way because it provides an opportunity to further clarify the Christian position.

On "1"... I don't see any kind of 'priest' in the New Testament other than one who pours himself out for the believers well being. Also.. believers are ALL 'priests'.. in one sense.

On 2 grrr.. how many times must I repeat myself... We are not advocating any kind of 'theocracy'. That's the Roman Catholic position more than protestant, (no..I'm not knocking Catholics here)
We are about the call to all men and women to embrace Christ as their Savior and Lord, and then, in the context of fellowship, to encourage one another and build one another up.. into more and more Christlikeness. There will be occasions where a person must be disfellowshipped due to intransigence over a moral issue.. for example.. if a member of the congregation was keeping a mistress besides his wife, and was advised about it.. "no, that is unnaceptable".. and kept on.. then he would be ostracized and invited not to attend meetings until he has sorted it out in humble repentance.

There is no call for 'Christian Government' in the sense of it being a platform of policy "We, if elected will make Christianity the official State religion and ban all others".... nope.. not like that at all.

We might be preaching.. or.. I prefer the term 'proclaiming/sharing' about God in Christ to you.. but its your perfect freedom and right to ignore it all :) No one is going to hold the mouth of your mind open and stuff 'religion' down it.

Fractelle..I hardly think that site was any kind of 'Christian' site.

Well boys...Ive got to admit Ive never, ever, ever, seen anything as a determined study on the sex crime/porn connection.
Ive never ever, ever, seen any politician stand up and say (what we all already knew), "there is a connection between sex crime and pornography and pornography is increasing sex crime and each year more and more women and children are at risk of rape and abuse because of the pornography".
Not one from either party.
It never, ever, ever made the media!
Its as if Australias political parties had shares in the porn industry...or were too chicken hearted to touch what many say is "freedoms".
They kept far, far, far away from the subject and no information was ever gathered anyway.
The first steps to declare the truth have never been made.
What I feel as distrust of governments and stats doesnt take away from the FACT! that the truth about the connection is never spoken about.
The more the porn increases the more the rapes and the abuse will increase also.
The rape victims and the women of Australia need to make an issue of it...a public rallying.
If a man feeds year after year on porn... he is going to be altered in his heart towards women.
Any other stance is a lie!

BOAZ my focus is the inappropriateness of the any theocracy to presume authority over individuals because of the prolonged history of abuse, including sexual which theocracies have inflicted and continue to inflict on both adults and children.

As for embracing Christ and the Lord, I need neither you or your theocracy, bible bashing, tambourines, hallelujahs, approval, supposed morality or “proclamations” to make honest and truthful communion with God.

Gibo “Cops aint dumb... they know what offenders look at. Ivan Milat would have fed his heart a mountain of porn prior to the Backpacker Murders. Cops knew this.”

You may claim statistics is wrong.

However, you offer up nothing to defend your position.

Like TLTR said to someone else on another thread

“Similarly, I never met a rapist who didn't eat food, or a male rapist without a penis.
Clearly, food and penises must be removed.”

I would observe, the psychological profile of rapists (or any other criminal) is the most important consideration in understanding how they can perpetrate their criminal acts (presence or absence of empathy, narcissism, paranoia, psychopathy).

Whilst, based on the apparent revenue value of the pornography industry, many millions of people enjoy pornography.
Banning pornography will not influence the psychological profile of any of them, least of all the tiny minority who commit sexual assaults.

A persons attitude has never been altered by prohibitions of a particular behaviour. If it had, we would have already eradicated racism, smoking, alcoholism and drug addiction and many other social blights.

Simply put, you are confusing “cause” and “effect”.

Further, honesty, reason and law are only ever favoured by a reasoned and logical argument, never an “emotional” one.

“What I feel as distrust of governments and stats doesnt take away from the FACT! that the truth about the connection is never spoken about.
The more the porn increases the more the rapes and the abuse will increase also.”

OK now prove, irrefutably, how pornography is a significant contributor to sexual assault and I will be prepared to believe you but until you do, I believe you to be “emotional”.

This subject really troubles me; I remain ambivalent.

Several years ago I asked a close friend if porn was terrible, and was then able to view some films to judge for myself. I made a nice Devonshire tea and settled down to watch.

Truthfully I enjoyed the scones and cream much more;-I thought the porn was stupid..for all concerned in it, including those who get their jollies from watching it. I had to become one of them to make that judgment.

BUT, that is just me. I perhaps should add here though, that the issue of FoS IS really becoming pretty malleable on OLO at the moment. It really can be stretched to fit almost anything;-including it seems postal stalking.

I guess that is inevitable when FoS is invoked as the only way. I will continue to argue that there is no such thing as FoS;- we are subject to restraints in so many ways. It is life.
(Buggered if I'll get into another deep and meaningful about this BTW.,)

A question to those who defend porn (I AM ambivalent about banning it).

Are you saying that pornography has NO influence on the abuse/rape of women?

Gibo - "The more the porn increases the more the rapes and the abuse will increase also."

I've posted links to research which provides good evidence that the reverse is actually true (at least in the USA).

"The more the porn increases the more the rapes and the abuse will decrease also." eg for ever 10% increase in internet access there is a corresponding 7.3% decrease in rape victimisation.
http://www.toddkendall.net/internetcrime.pdf

Is that simple enough for you?

Your choice to ignore the evidence does not excuse you. If you believe that the material I've referenced is wrong then provide some reason based arguments why it's wrong and references to viable material (not from "The Moral Minority") which supports your claims.

R0bert

I dont need evidence COL for my position.
I saw it in life experience over those years as I grew up and as I watched the growth of porn and the rise in the sex crime.
I WAS AN EYE WITNESS.
As a policeman I knew what was going on with criminal behaviour.
I WAS AN EYE WITNESS.
Do you know what an eye witness is?
Its someone who sees the truth occuring and can give testimony to that truth.
Porn is abusing and even killing women and young girls all over the world.
Its feeding men sexual hate to do the criminal act!

Gibo, I sincerely hope you weren't a policeman, or at least, developed your current beliefs after you left the service.
The idea of you in a position of authority scares me.

You say you 'witnessed' the rise in rapes and pornography - even if there was a distinct rise, which is possible though I've not seen proof, I could just as easily point out that I saw the rise in the number of cars on the road, and the rise in murders.

Would one be linked to the other?

I can think of a vast number of factors at play here.

Gibo - address this: all people have sexual urges. Would it not be reasonable to put forward the notion, that those with aggressive sex drives but who are unable to procure sex, will resort to rape if they cannot access pornography?

Something I suspect you've not considered. Nor the morality of denying pornography to people who may be disabled in some way and are unable to find a sexual partner, but still have urges.

But oh no - the Christian way is suppression for these people, is it not? Denying basic urges?

Has it occurred to you, that most forms of repression inevitably lead to aggression?

End fact, Gibo, is you have nothing but an opinion, and there already are studies, just none that you're willing to look at.

And you've admitted you do not have an open mind on the subject, so I guess it's kind of pointless attempting to point out facts or reason.

Posted by Gibo recently on this discussion "Ive never, ever, ever, seen anything as a determined study on the sex crime/porn connection.
" http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=1644#31829

Posted by TurnRightThenLeft on the first page of this discussion "Subsidised by the Howard Government’s Australia Research Council, “senior academic researchers” Katherine Albury, Alan McKee and Catharine Lumby embarked on the “Understanding Pornography in Australia” research project, and The Porn Book is the result of their findings." http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=1644#31661

Posted by myself on the same page "Todd Kendall's paper
http://www.toddkendall.net/internetcrime.pdf " http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=1644#31672

Posted by Col on page 3 of this discussion "A Danish study, across four countries, suggests the rate of assault declined after Pornography was legalized.
http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/proceedings/14/kutchinsky.pdf " http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=1644#31728

Along with a number of other worthwhile references provided by Col and Fractelle.

Gibo if you have "never, ever, ever, seen anything as a determined study on the sex crime/porn connection" it's because you have deliberately and pointedly refused too look at them when they are put in front of you.

You say you were in the police, how well would it have gone down if a speeding driver after having driven past a number of clearly marked (and easy to see) speed signs claimed that he had not seen any speed signs or refused to accept those speed signs because he did not trust speed signs or because they did not indicate the speed he wanted to travel at then expected to be excused for his speeding ?

R0bert

Gibo “I dont need evidence COL for my position.”

Only God can make that claim and whilst you may delude yourself to your omnipotence, I doubt you could convince anyone else of it.

I think it is the deadly sin of “pride” to presume you are above being expected to justify your claims with evidence.

I guess pericles was right in his post, credibility is something which cannot be compromised when it does not exist.

As a police officer you should have been aware of “due process” and the separation of powers.

The arrogance you have displayed here suggests it must have been very hard for you not to be allowed to be the judge and the jury as well as the plod.

But that is the process which we live with, separation of duties and an expectation of reliable evidence.

Not some one man kangaroo court which you arrogantly believe you are entitled to run, over the rights of other people in regard to what they should be allowed, as consenting adults to view.

TRTL and Robert, this is like a three musketeers moment and in Gibo we have met Cardinal Richelieu (certainly the same theocratic arrogance) maybe BOAZ will “drag” along, as de Winter :-)

Numerous research has shown links between pornography, rape and child sexual abuse. The deniers are obviously far more interested in protecting their little bit of perversion rather than be concerned for the common good of society. why bother pointing to this research to those who are so bound and blind by their own lusts that the deny the most obvious. Next they will be denying that advertising has any effect on people.

Fractelle, sexinchrist.com LMFAO! ha ha ha

thanks

by the way speaking of LMAO but completely off the topic check out engrish.com

runner, I for one am very interested in the 'numerous research' for links between pornography, rape an child abuse. Seriously.

Please post some links, or at least some citations I can go to the library with.

There have been many studies lately that that seem to show that there isn't one, but if they are wrong, then I am basing my viewpoints on erroneous information. I need sources, please. Thanks.

Hey Mule, thanks

Had forgotten all about Engrish.com - great way to waste time, found this which I do believe is quite on topic:

http://littlurl.com/gsfj7

Completely on topic now.

OK - I am not a fan of censorship, however, some porn is utterly vile and I don't care whether the rape or violence was pretend it is just degrading to whomever the rape or torture or humiliation is being perpetrated on. Until we can raise children in a society where sex is seen as natural and both boys and girls are to be respected, then this type of gratuitous porn will always find a mainstream audience. And that's sad - its not just a few sickos, because clearly the porn industry is raking in the dollars.

Banning it doesn't work, but education does.

The fact that porn is often so boring and mechanical at best and degrading at worst is due to our societal hang-ups about sex. The more sex is seen as somehow dirty or a sin, the more it is treated as a fetish and objectified.

And these god-botherers who are so 'bothered' by sex - just look at Boaz's lame comment on the Sexinchrist website, because it is all about sex it can't be "christian" he claims. Ha! Ha! Ha!

No wonder you have to evangelise all the time to get new recruits - you sure can't be doing much procreating.

• Women Against Pornography estimate that about 1.2 million children are annually exploited in commercial sex (child pornography and prostitution).
• Psychologist Edward Donnerstein (University of Wisconsin) found that brief exposure to violent forms of pornography can lead to anti-social attitudes and behavior.
• Pornography (especially violent pornography) can produce an array of undesirable effects such as rape and sexual coercion. Specifically studies have found that such exposure can lead to increased use of coercion or rape, increased fantasies about rape, and desensitization to sexual violence and trivialization of rape.
• Researchers Dolf Zillman and Jennings Bryant showed that continued exposure to pornography had serious adverse effects on beliefs about sexuality in general and on attitudes toward women in particular.
• One study demonstrated that pornography can diminish a person’s sexual happiness.
• Extensive interviews with sex offenders (rapists, incest offenders, and child molesters) have uncovered a sizable percentage of offenders who use pornography to arouse themselves prior to and during their assaults.
• Police officers have seen the impact pornography has had on serial murders. In fact, pornography consumption is one of the most common profile characteristics of serial murders and rapists.3
http://www.antonellagambotto.com/PornographyEffects.htm
http://www.protectkids.com/effects/harms.htm
http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2004/11/65772
http://www.ankerberg.org/Articles/practical-christianity/PC0607W2.htm

TRTL.
I see what you say, as I see what COL is on about, and RObert, but society still cannot get passed the fact, and it is fact guys, that porn is the "firing up" effect, the great power in inspiring those open to the sex violence to go and do the evil they do.
Do we give a loaded gun to kids to play with?
Why give porn to a society in decline into alcohol, drugs and violence...a society moving away from a moral code like Gods Word?
This conflict between the anti-porners and the pro-porners will go on for a longtime.
The reason here being, is that the pro-porners love the porn and they dont want to let go of it even for the safety of society.
The human heart loves it.
I was there too before I became a born again christian.
Praise The Lord He openned my eyes and got rid of the foul, wicked thing.
As I said I was an eyewitness to change over four decades.
I knew the criminal and I observed what I observed and what I saw was true. TRUE!
Porn spread across the globe and the sex crime increased to amazing levels.
It was that simple.
All of the talk here isnt going to change it.
You girls need to remember that porn is a great, a huge threat to your personal safety.
I look forward to the day when you stand up and shout this truth out. I tell you girls, from the bottom of my heart...I will be there with you that day.
I will stand in any public demonstration you arrange.
Good one Runner.
Youre a good knight. I appreciate your input.

Gibo “that porn is the "firing up" effect, the great power in inspiring those open to the sex violence to go and do the evil they do.”

If you read the papers at the end of the links I have supplied you would observe the objective evidence and studies appear say the opposite.

Repeating myself

The http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/proceedings/14/kutchinsky.pdf

report might imply a ban might well increase the incidence of rape (simple logic, if removing a ban reduces the incidence of event, reinstalling a ban will increase the incidence of an event).

If you wish to claim that pornography is the “firing up” effect, (the catalyst is what you mean) “inspiring those open to the sex violence to go and do the evil they do”.

Then I will challenge you with this.

Driving a motor vehicle is the “firing up” effect for those inspiring those open to reckless and culpable driving to go and do the evil they do.

(And you have to admit we have a lot of hoons on the roads, more hoons than rapists.)

The parallel solution to your ban of pornography, in my analogy, would require motor vehicles to likewise be banned.

But the real flaw in your argument is this

You are suggesting pornography acts as a catalyst to a pre-existing intent or disposition, it inspires the sex violence it does not cause the sex violence which must be there, in the person initially.

Why not spend your time and effort trying to identify why some people are so disposed to sex violence and doing evil (the evil bit I believe is when the other party is not consenting to any act be it sexual or otherwise)

http://www.aardvarc.org/rape/about/whowhy.shtml makes a good attempt and notably does not mention “pornography” among the causes of sexual based crimes.

continued....

Aardvard “An Abuse, Rape and Domestic Violence Aid and Resource Collection” it is not a pro-porn or anti-censorship site

verbatim from the site

You need to read it

As far as what "causes" sex offenders to become offenders, there are a myriad of theories. Some of the major ones include:

• That offending is a learned behavior. Most sex offenders have been victimized at some point in their youth and thus they learned that it's better to be the one to HAVE the power than to be the one SUBJECTED to the power of others. Since they know what it's like to be the victim, they can appreciate being the power holder on the other side of the equation more keenly.

• That offenders have arrested development especially in the areas of empathy. This prevents them from feeling and relating within contexts - from understanding what their actions cause others to feel - because they can't "relate" and so have not learned to inhibit their own actions.

• That offenders act out in reaction to low self esteem. They use their violent actions to exercise control and power to enhance their own self image, to feel powerful, and to dominate others thus making them feel better about themselves.

• That offenders have excessively high levels of self esteem. Opposite from the above, this theory suggests that people with high self-esteem are likely to respond aggressively when their inflated view of themselves is threatened by criticism or perceived insult or when someone obstructs their need for gratification. Gang members have high self-esteem. So do spouse abusers. On a narcissism scale, violent criminals, long thought to be “acting out” low self-esteem, obtained a higher mean score than people in any other category. In short: the higher one’s self-esteem, the lower one’s self-control or that the higher one thinks of oneself, the less regard one has for others.

Better you read the whole site, it is objective and informative.

It also echoes the forcible rape statistics from US DoJ showing a decline in recent years.

I found no mention pornography.

Well folks thanks for your participation.
I dont feel to continue on unless someone has something extra-ordinary.
We've had a say and I simply cant go beyond my life experiences to look at vacant reports, so-called studies from this place and that, peoples inclinations and lusts for fleshie things etc.
I havent seen anything that convinced me that porn isnt an "end of a civilisation encouragement".
The Bible says NO to sexual immorality (as BOAZ_David says for the betterment of mankind).
To me, pornography remains one of the biggest threats to the modern world we have along with militant Islam, drugs, alcohol, a rising militaristic China etc.
Its an extremely destructive influence with growing boys, that will lead many later on into sex crime.
...and the federal governments of Australia have done nothing about restricting it apart from labelling it with categories.
Its got to get dealt with.

"Its an extremely destructive influence with growing boys, that will lead many later on into sex crime." - that would be smacking which is fiercly defended by some of our resident fundies.

There is a strong causal correlation between smacking and sexual violence but no proven one between use of porn and sexual violence.

I consider militant religious fundamentalism a far greater threat to the modern world than the items you have listed.

Reason is likely to have some impact on the others but it seems to have little impact when it comes to religious fundamentalism.

R0bert

RObert.
Nothing needs to be proven re: porn and sex crime.
We know human nature.
We see the sex crime.
There is no other influence known to be causing it.
For the sake of the girls and the women of tomorrow it has be finished with.
It needs to become a criminal offence to possess it.
If it doesnt the world of tomorrow will be a terrible place to live. I wonder how many of you men in this column are part of the porn industry or the lobby.

Pornography is now a $7-billion+ a year industry, whose products are easily available in cities around the country. This material ranges from the 'soft-core' type, consisting essentailly of nude women in various poses, to the 'hard-core' variety, which shows women in various sexual acts and often depicts them being stripped, bound, assaulted, tortured, and other wise humiliated and degraded.

Pornography has become deeply controversial largely because many people believe that it directly or indirectly causes sex crimes.

Studies of the issue have genrally produced inconclusive findings, as it is difficult in practice to prove or disprove a general causal link between the use of pornography and acts such as rape or incest.

Although the link between pornography and behaviour is still undetermined, the link between pornography and attitudes is not.

There is now ample evidence that men who are exposed to pornography tend, at least temporarily, to have more callous attitudes towards women afterward. (Malamuth and Donnerstein, 1994).

There can be little question that whether or not pornography causes violence, it creates a climate in which women come to be seen as mere sex objects, existing solely to satisfy men's desires.

Because of this, some feminist groups have formed an unusual alliance with conservative religious organisations to demand that pornography be restricted or banned.

Other people, ranging from pornography consumers to civil-liberties groups, resist the suggestion. One objection is the difficulty of agreeing on what is pornographic. Another objection is the protection of 'Freedom of Expression' on the grounds that censorship itself is a greater danger to a free society than any censored material could every be ("Lady Chatterley" case in Britain).

The public remains divided on the issue.

A 1995 Gallup poll found that a bare majority oppose further restrictions on pornography in general, but nearly three-quarters favour a ban on portrayals of sexual violence. Public opinion is also divided along sex lines: a 1996 poll found that half of all women, but only a quarter of men, are 'very concerned' about pornography.

One of the best stories on the thread Foxy.
Thanks muchly for it.
I would like to see someone, somewhere establish a national Anti-porn Day to draw attention to the crime connection.
Perhaps I need to pray about it a lot.
There was a chap called OE on another thread who had a wonderful testimony.
He said in 40years as a parole officer he hadnt met a sex offender that hadnt fed on porn.
Its testimonies like his that point to a truth more clear than the "pro-porner" men on this thread want to know about.

Fractelle said:

"Until we can raise children in a society where sex is seen as natural and both boys and girls are to be respected,then this type of gratuitous porn will always find a mainstream audience."

EXACTLY!... and the key to achieving this, is a values framework where degredation of other humans for our frivolous entertainment is totally rejected and scorned.

Fractelle.. are you by any chance suggesting that Christians don't regard sex as 'natural'? Seems that way by your comment. I suggest though, we need to go further than just recognizing it as natural.. it is also very dangerous, just like a gun.. if you spray bullets anyold where.. a lot of people can be hurt.

COL.. aah..I see I have much work stil:)

You keep on addressing a religion which niether Gibo, Runner nor myself are presenting. You speak of

"my focus is the inappropriateness of the any theocracy to presume authority over individuals because of the prolonged history of abuse, including sexual which theocracies have inflicted and continue to inflict on both adults and children."

Now..I guess ur meaning here some kind of human organization type 'theocracy'? and that's exactly what I said we are NOT promoting..nor proclaiming. We are announcing 'Christ' and salvation in Him... we are calling men and women to repentance from sin...and to life in Christ.
"We" are not going to suddenly 'lord it over' anyone to come to the Lord.. it's between He and them. I would expect though, that any person turning to Christ would seek fellowship from like minded people with whom he feels socially and spiritually comfortable.

Forget the Stats... Porn is degrading, evil, disgusting, insulting to God and dehumanizing...full stop.

I am not going to add to the arguments already made or repeat the views I stated on the violent porn thread (which I can't find for the moment).

I would only ask this:

Would those of you who so ardently approve of porn in all its various forms aspire for your daughter to be involved in a porn flick?

If the answer is no, ask yourselves why that might be?

If it is not appropriate for your own child why would it be for someone else's.

pelican, there are a lot of things in the world that I'd not aspire for my son to be involved in but which I still don't think should be banned. There are a lot of things which I don't necessarily "approve" of which I'd still fight against them being banned.

There are a lot of jobs which people choose to do for various reasons which are not part of my aspirations for my son - have you seen the film Kenny?

Resisting those who want to limit the free choices of other adults does not imply approval of all those choices.

R0bert

Thanks for your polite response RObert.

In essence I agree with the thrust of your point however, reference Kenny, while I would not want my child particularly to enter that industry :) - if they were happy doing it, I could not see any harm in being a port-a-loo operator. I can see the harm in the other though.

I was more asking people to think about the reasons why you would not aspire to your child entering the porn industry. And when thinking about those reasons, this might give you some clue as to why others are so against violent porn. (And not necessarily because of religious dogma)

I had a friend guys from the old motorcycle days of the 60's and 70's who got seduced into the porn film industry (oddly he had an ASIO connection so someone said) who picked up a virus that withered an arm.
I think it was HIV AIDS.
I miss the guy because Im sure he is dead now. God forgive him. He was just one of the victims of foul pornography.

Pelican

You stole my thunder - and thank you.

I have to wonder why, prostitution and porn acting are never on the careers lists at school. What exciting futures these careers offer?

I am sure that because porn films are so benign and portray women in such a positive light that Col Rouge and others have no doubt recommended to their daughters what a valid career choice these professions could be.

Of course, every one who has ever been involved in these professions, would never exclude them from their CV's seeing as there is no link to violence, exploitation, drugs and demeaning the status of women and children. Nor are there any links to the sexual slave trade and organised crime. Porn is just a bit of innocent fun. Well it could be, but I have yet to see a porn flick that made me feel proud to be a woman. Porn like anything that can be exploited to the detriment of people's self-esteem needs regulation - not censorship.

As I have stated previously we need to educate our children to respect the other sex as valid worthwhile humans. Neither male nor female was created for the use of the other.

Boaz - your reaction to the christian web-site proves, just how hung up you are about sex. If such a simple little website disturbs you, then you do indeed have problems with seeing sex as a natural activity.

Gibo,
I usually do not bother to read what you post, but seeing the number of posts here I decided to see what the attraction was.

I am in agreement with most posters here, which is opposite to you, runner and Boaz. One area of concern to me is the availability of porn to children because children try to emulate adults. In some of the porn I have seen the actions and poses are not normal, in my view, and I would not like to think that children deemed them to be normal.

What is interesting in this debate is that you state that you don't believe in stats and you don't need evidence to form your opinion. Well then why do you ask government to carry out a study on porn if you won't accept their findings unless it coincides with your pre-determined opinion. It seems to me that you haven,t read any of the many links provided by Col Rouge, TRTL and others, which indicates you have a completly closed mind.

In these circumstances why bother to ask for a study?

Fractelle, one of the reasons people who've had involvement would be the naked prejudice shown by many against porn. People do a lot of things which it's safer to keep quiet about because extremists are likely to discriminate against them if they become aware of it.

I get the point which you and Pelican are making and it is valid to a point but that's sufficient reason to try and ban consenting adults from taking part.

R0bert

A question to those who defend porn (I AM ambivalent about banning it).

Are you saying that pornography has NO influence on the abuse/rape of women?
Posted by Ginx, Friday, 4 April 2008 4:20:09 PM

.............any takers?

R0bert

At no point have I suggested banning porn - on this or any other thread. While it is hardly the highest level of human expression, porn does have a place in the human spectrum of sexuality.

It is interesting that you choose to claim I wrote something that I didn't, and then to avoid the issues I raised.

Such as extreme porn degrading people - mostly women. And why, if the sex industry is so acceptable, is not work in it regarded as a viable career path and on the syllabus at schools? Just think little Suzy could study blow-jobs 101 - mum and dad would be so proud.

You attach more importance to smacking as a cause of sexual dysfunction than you do pornographic images. Where is your evidence of this? Or are you simply justifying the type of porn you like to watch? As I suspect those who persistently claim that porn is completely harmless, the ones who single out paedophilia as blame worthy but anything else, apparently, is fine - as long as the adults are consenting of course. How we can be sure of that? I really don't know.

Banning porn seems to work for Islamic countries like Iran:
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/HRW/8555dd50ea4dfc4df314e67aee126a22.htm

Doesn't it?
http://www.dhushara.com/book/sakina/stoningetc/rapeiran.htm

Although that last link was from 2000, porn has always been banned in Iran.

Yes, Gibo et al., we should all follow Iran's example. After all, it won't make any difference.

BOAZ you seem to find something contentious in my view of theology.

I find something contentious in your condemnation of pornography.

I, as a mature and tolerant adult am perfectly happy to allow you to pursue you religious devotions and turn my back on what I consider an indulgent exercise in self-righteousness and pointlessness.

I some how think you lack the maturity and tolerance to respect those who enjoy pornography and consider they indulge themselves in what some might consider a pointless, self indulgent pursuit.

It seems hypocritical of you, that what someone like you considers a detrimental personal choice should have any greater authority to what I consider a detrimental personal choice, especially when I can provide objective research which contradicts your assertion and evidentiary news reports of the predatory habits of priests, which supports my assertion.

Gibo, your mate with the withered arm. Remembering back a mate of my youth, was pillion on a motor bike, crashed into an oncoming car, motor cycle driver lost his entire right leg, my mate lost his right leg below the knee, his right arm he lost nerves to and decided to have it cut off rather than leave it there to wither.
Fortunately they had crash helmets on, my mates helmet cracked and he had deep scars on his forhead, otherwise he would be dead. Which would have been a tragic loss because he was doing a PhD in something when I knew him.

Maybe we should ban motorcycles.

Regarding children accessing pornography, I have commented on this already.

Anyone supplying a child with PC should only do so with a machine which has full firewall and virus protection, or risk the PC collapsing under the weight of invasive Trojan viruses. The system I use is “VET” look it up with google. It comes with a comprehensive censorship system to curtail adult sites and chat rooms etc.

The pro-censorship lobby have failed to produce objective data to support their claim of the detrimental effects of pornography. The anti-censorship lobby have produced objective data to support their view.

Anti-censorship WINS!

I find this conversation about pornography, that seems to pervade OLO over several threads lately, quite fascinating. While I personally find pornography generally quite boring and often distasteful, I've argued that I see no strong argument for banning it as far as consenting adults are concerned.

This position makes me a curious bedfellow (so to speak) with some correspondents, with whom I share a passion for the defence of free speech and expression, if nothing else. While I haven't noticed anybody much arguing that porn is a force for 'good'. neither has any of the very vocal anti-porn contingent produced any solid evidence that it is 'bad'.

As far as I can tell, the arguments against pornography here depend entirely upon opinion, which is based on ideology or personal taste, rather than upon reliable evidence or valid research.

For example, we have the Christian nutters like Gibo, Boazy and runner, who say that they don't care if their wowserism is supported by evidence or not, because they say their God doesn't approve:

Gibo: "Nothing needs to be proven re: porn and sex crime.
We know human nature.
We see the sex crime.
There is no other influence known to be causing it. "

One wonders why Gibo calls for a study, since he won't accept its findings - not that he'd understand them.

Boazy: "Forget the Stats... Porn is degrading, evil, disgusting, insulting to God and dehumanizing...full stop."

Because God and Boazy et al say so.

[cont]

[cont]

I'm afraid that I find the 'feminist' versions of wowserism just as unconvincing. While they are dressed up as being more evidence-based than their godbothering counterparts, ultimately they are unable to cite any convincingly scientific evidence to support their case. Like the Christian wowsers, pornography offends the morality derived from their ideology, so they don't really care if their objections are based on scientific reality - porn is exploitative, degrading, offensive etc... because they don't like it.

Sorry, but none of these are strong arguments. The fact that it's apprently a substantial industry indicates that there are many consumers of this stuff out there, and I submit that they have rights that outweigh those who ultimately simply diapprove of porn for ideological reasons.

That doesn't mean that I actively like or support pornography - in fact, it's on about the same level as Rugby League in my list of interests. However, those who bleat on about how wicked, degrading, evil etc that pornography is would need to present far stronger arguments, based on hard evidence, before I would change that assessment.

I reiterate that I'm talking about pornography that is consumed and produced by consenting adults. Any other kind is, of course, repugnant and properly illegal.

Yeah the rape of children, the degradation of men and women, the marriage breakups are not enough to convince people. How blind and hard hearted can people possibly be. At least some feasting on this perversion are honest enough to admit they are in bondage to this rubbish. Others hide behind the supposedly intellectual arguement of defending free speech. You argue that the opponents of porn lack proof and yet you are totally blinded by your perverted hearts.

CJ

You said: "I reiterate that I'm talking about pornography that is consumed and produced by consenting adults. Any other kind is, of course, repugnant and properly illegal."

Is it illegal? I haven't seen a lot of porn, I admit, but even so what I saw was very degrading to women. Women were little more than receptacles for whatever some men wanted to insert into whichever orifice they chose. I don't see how this type of porn is enlightening for young males (or girls).

Sex is great fun, have yet to see porn than presents it as a joy for all the participants.

I reiterate; I do not call for censorship. Just regulation so that the extreme stuff isn't made. As for the other less extreme stuff; just greater restriction on who gets to view it.

How often have I talked about educating our boys and girls to respect other on this thread?

Even you have labelled as "feminists" those who are for banning it completely. How do you know they are feminists? There are plenty of "feminists' like myself who are simply calling for moderation, that's all and there are feminists who don't have a problem with porn at all: the rainbow spectrum of human opinion? So please desist from the labelling - feminists are no more a single homogenous group than any other.

It is all very well saying that you, find it boring, clearly there are many men who don't, because the industry is such a money spinner. Clearly there are men who like to be stimulated by women as receptacles, because I guess, a real women with real needs and desires is just too scary. Hell, she may even want to be satisfied.

Imagine porn that actually showed a couple making love; real pleasure, real joy, real tenderness - I'd like to see that.

BTW, a question that has yet to be answered, posted by both Pelican and myself:

Would you actively encourage your daughter into a "career" in prostitution or porn acting if you believe it is so harmless?

Fractelle: "I don't see how this type of porn is enlightening for young males (or girls)."

It's not supposed to be enlightening! It's mostly supposed to be a masturbatory aid. In that sense, porn is entirely fit for purpose.

Fractelle: "Sex is great fun, have yet to see porn than presents it as a joy for all the participants."

Well, that's odd, because over 90% of porn* presents it self as just that. The boys are all well-hung and up for it, the girls are big-breasted and gagging for it. They're all "sex objects" — men and women alike. You can find the sort of porn you'd prefer — sex within a loving relationship — but the market is mostly for pumped-up pumping. Guess it's all about how you define fun.

Despite a gazillion studies, it doesn't appear that porn is particularly harmful. Working in porn, on the other hand, generally isn't fun. I say this on every porn thread — the porn industry is pretty depressing. Like the real acting world, a few stars make gazillions, most get about the same amount of money they'd get turning a trick. Porn sets are saturated in drugs — they are the reason why people are there and the reason why they can get through it. For every empowered "I'm working my way through law school!" woman there are a hundred girls who have been sexually abused or, for whatever reasons, have few options, but are extremely pretty. They are very often not happy people. It is very hard to get real statistics about the porn industry because most people have some barrow to push, but some women who work in the industry believe that *most* women who end up acting in porn were sexually abused as children.**

For the record, if my daughter or son were in danger of ending up in porn I would go to the ends of the earth to satisfy myself it was *really* what they wanted to do. I wouldn't be easily satisfied.

*Just made that up, but it's probably true.

For those who think porn or "freedom decisions" towards porn viewing are suitable, I might like to point out that with the pornography and the sex shops that sell the material there comes an increase in brothels in local societies (which has occured) because the men are being increasingly aroused by the films and the photos and like the addict want more than two dimensional, with the brothels comes the pimps, with the pimps comes the drugs they feed to the girls to keep them in bondage, with the pimps comes the underground handguns in order for the pimps to protect their turf, in areas where there are brothels there is an increase in drunkenness because many of the guys wouldnt go to a brothel unless they are drunk, on and on it goes right down to an increase in lone wolf prowlers in vicinities of brothels looking for women in those vicinities... to rubbish in the streets disgarded from the cars of the drunken sexually immoral.
The final analysis: porn increases crime.
To a Holy God there is no difference between the porner, the porn photographer, the pedophile, the pimp, the prostitute and/or the free speecher who says no to changes in freedoms so porn cannot be banned. All are involved in sexual immorality and the fall of a civilisation and need to confess the sin and turn from it to get free from the curses that go with it.

Fractelle, "At no point have I suggested banning porn - on this or any other thread." sorry if I've misunderstood or misrepresented your position. Maybe we are just at different places on the spectrum regarding control.

I attempted to answer the question about having a child take up a role in porn. There are a lot of jobs that I'd not aspire for my son to do and which the schools don't encourage kids to take up. Porn is on a spectrum along with a lot of other roles which people do but which parents would hope their kids don't take up.

As I said earlier there are a lot of things which society tolerates but which we don't encourage (and some we seem to encourage which I'd rather we did not such as christian propaganda in the schools).
Porn carries a social stigma which places it in the shadows.

How much of the harm done to those working in porn is a result of the job itself and how much is a result of the need to be somewhat secretive to avoid the wrath of the anti-porn crowd?

I'm not convinced that further controls are likely to produce any real benefits and I am convinced that further restrictions on access are likely to produce real harm. The evidence that increased access to porn has reduced the numbers of sexual assaults is fairly convincing.

R0bert

Quite frankly, on this issue I don't see any difference between the Gibos and Boazys with the imams and mullahs of a certain religion they like to bag at every opportunity.

What really gets my goat is how they like to say "the women must be protected", from themselves if necessary. All the Muslim clerics like to say just the same thing.
It's a slippery slope from here.

We must protect the women from the lust that lurks in mens hearts.
We must cover up the women to protect them from the lustful gazes of wicked men.
We must prevent women from inflaming the urges of men by wearing cosmetics.
We must prevent women from being adulterous by not allowing them to be alone with men that are not their husbands.......

What we must do is to teach our kids to look after themselves. Banning porn is not going to do it. In fact, banning porn is not going to make anything better. Censorship is one of the first steps in developing a police state (it happened somewhat to a mild degree in QLD with Bjelke-Petersen remember?). It won't stop at porn. I for one will resist any theocratic dictates or lobbies that try to legislate behaviour on a scriptural or faith-based fantasy.

Look at all the countries that have banned porn in any form. Look at the ones that are considered 'permissive'. Now, ask yourself: on an average, which ones would you rather live in?

DAMN IT ALL!!.....................ARE YOU SAYING THAT PORNOGRAPHY HAS NO INFLUENCE ON THE ABUSE/RAPE OF WOMEN?

Are YOU saying the exact opposite R0bert?:-

".....The evidence that increased access to porn has reduced the numbers of sexual assaults is fairly convincing."

Posted by R0bert, Monday, 7 April 2008 12:14:21 PM

SOMEBODY? ANYBODY?..................HELLOOOOOOOOOOOOO??

Ginx, Col and I have both posted links to research which shows that with increased internet takeup sexual assaults have reduced.
Col's material was for Denmark/norther europe I think and the material I referenced was for the USA. http://www.toddkendall.net/internetcrime.pdf

My understanding of the US material is as follows

For every 10% increase in internet usage there was a corresponding 7.3% drop in sexual assaults (my wording may not be accurate).
There was no corresponding drop in other crimes stats and the stats were based on state by state figures - eg states with higher internet takeup had larger drops in the rates of sexual assaults than states slower to adopt the internet.

The effect was most pronounced in sexual assault committed by teenage boys - the group who otherwise have the most difficult in getting access to porn (or actual sex).

Simply put they are meeting some of their needs with porn which reduces the pressure to find another outlet.

I suspect that some real hard cases will use porn to get ideas rather than release but overall it appears that rates of sexual assault go down as access to porn improves.

I also suspect that a contributing factor to sexual violence is the guilt and hang ups that some try to attach to sex outside marriage and that exposure to a larger range of scenarios may help reduce that but thats just my specualtion and is not based on any research that I know of.

R0bert

Thanks R0bert.

I've said all along I remain ambivalent. About censorship.

I have to say that no matter what stats or studies are put up here,- (go into these stats/studies in finite detail and one finds that the criteria they are based on can be flawed...,depending on the way one views them. The lies, damned lies and statistics syndrome!)-, I will never be persuaded that pornography has NO influence on the subsequent treatment of women (I have talked to more than one wife who was distressed at being asked to emulate what her husband had watched in a porn video...; don't ask for sources; I won't discuss that further),- and I simply don't believe that it REDUCES 'disrespectful' behaviour toward women.

I wanted a reply though, and you gave me one; thanks!

Ginx, " have talked to more than one wife who was distressed at being asked to emulate what her husband had watched in a porn video"

I believe you on that regard but then we don't get to bothered by other things which might distress a partner to be asked to emulate.

Lifestyle programs and womens mags featuring expensive houses, furniture and holidays is one that springs to mind. How many marriages have been wrecked by one party always wanting more and creating pressure (emotional and or financial) in persuit of it.

The stats I and Col have referenced are relevant in relation to the oft repeated claim that porn increases sexual violence.

To all readers
Really the issue is about an individuals right to control their own body and choose for themselves. The argument that causes me to accept a womans right to terminate a pregnancy she does not want also says that adults who choose to create or use porn have that right.

The argument that says women can control their own bodies in marriage says that the interests of a partner should not override an individuals choices legally (although I believe people in relationships should by choice place the others needs at a level with their own or higher).

If we surrender one group of adults rights to control of their own bodies we surrender it for all adults. If it's OK for someone else's ethical concerns or moral objections to a choice to overrule an individuals autonomy for an act that does not directly harm another then it's OK for other choices and acts to also be overriden.

R0bert

Robert “The effect was most pronounced in sexual assault committed by teenage boys - the group who otherwise have the most difficult in getting access to porn (or actual sex).”

And the age/gender group most likely to be if not obsessed, at least motivated, to spend time on the internet are teenage boys, thus the time a boy is pursuing internet imagery, he is not pursuing real life girls.

Ginx “I will never be persuaded that pornography has NO influence on the subsequent treatment of women “

That is for you to prove and not to be presumed as fact.

I would note, the reliability of statistics and how they can be “bent” is not in the statistical process itself but in the direct and unambiguous (or otherwise) way the test questions are presented to subjects, how the subjects are selected, the criteria which are measured, their relative significance and the sample sizes.

Standing outside a synagogue on a Friday, asking people wearing black hats for their view on pornography or the holocaust will produce a different level of interest than asking the same questions on a Saturday morning, of people carrying shopping bags, outside Coles.

Because in both scenarios, the former will have an over representation of Orthodox Jews and Saturday morning shoppers, an under representation of Orthodox Jews. That is how to turn statistics into lies.

Robert “Really the issue is about an individuals right to control their own body and choose for themselves.”

Agree Robert and I note the reasoning style of the “fors” versus the emotionalism of the “againsts” echoes pro-choice versus anti-choice in the abortion debate, almost exactly.

One set of folk adamant in the rights of the individual and the other set of folk adamant about the need to curtail individual liberty.

I will never understand why so many people are so intent in controlling the discretionary pursuits of strangers. I can only conclude their lives are so shallow and meaningless, they need to control the rights of others to give them purpose.

Col, the more I think about it the more this debate looks like a mini-version of the abortion and homsexuality debates.

I don't think that the issue is as serious as those debates but then the level of fervor of the fundies is probably not as extreme (although Gibo does leave me wondering).

R0bert

"Ginx “I will never be persuaded that pornography has NO influence on the subsequent treatment of women “

That is for you to prove and not to be presumed as fact." (Quote: Thatcher's Boy)

Excuse me??

It is NOT for me to 'prove' anything!!

Just as it is not for you to prove the reverse.

As for 'presumption of fact'!!....er...;..excuse me?

THAT from the learnéd gentleman? Presumption. Fact.

Are you with me yet?

.....even "dearest Margaret" would laugh at your attempted legalese!

Robert "fervor of the fundies is probably not as extreme" Yes they have not started to shoot porn shop operators, although some years ago I do recall one property in Malbourne which opened to sell magazines etc did get fire bombed.

Ginx "THAT from the learnéd gentleman? Presumption. Fact.

Are you with me yet?

.....even "dearest Margaret" would laugh at your attempted legalese!"

Oh dear, you descend as usual, to the level of

A common truckies mate....(Are you with me yet?)

"Oh dear, you descend as usual, to the level of
A common truckies mate....(Are you with me yet?)"

Posted by Col Rouge, Tuesday, 8 April 2008 6:55:49 PM
___________________________

No ducky, I wouldn't descend to the level of getting into your truck, that is WAY too low, so....; sorry,-I won't be with you.

Oh Ginx, you tiresome twitt.

trying to be witty.

"No ducky, I wouldn't descend to the level of getting into your truck, that is WAY too low, so....; sorry,-I won't be with you."

Well, you are too dull to realise, I am not the one who drives a truck nor the one of us who accept lifts in trucks.

As to "ducky", well it does rhyme with "truckie",

So very "camp" of you.

I am sure your mother thinks you are a real "little treasure" but both too little and the wrong gender to interest me, despite how "fascinating" I am to you.

Now run away and play on the freeway.

"Ginx “I will never be persuaded that pornography has NO influence on the subsequent treatment of women “

That is for you to prove and not to be presumed as fact."
____________________

See;-that's the thing TB; response is one thing, 'tis a forum after all. But THAT little one liner was NOT warranted and not appreciated.

...........just pointing out to you that YOU initiated the putdown. Thought I'd mention that, because being who WE are TB, it appears we are up for the long haul. So be it.

OK:-

1) Twit is spelled with only the one T.

2) I..er, DID know you were not the one 'who drives trucks or accepts lifts in them'...( I never thought of you as being a bit of a dimwit;-you cover it up really well,..but occasionally...).

3) So Ducky rhymes with Truckie hey? Well golly gosh! and gee whiz! TB, aren't you clever!!

4) Ummmm;-..er, certainly not the TYPE for you (!.!.!.!.!),-that's for sure; but not the right gender eh? OKKKKKKKKKK......

So many things you have posted now make more sense. I confess to being somewhat bemused by your rather effeminate and decidedly uxorious affection for Madge. NOW I understand.
______________________________________________________

"I believe you on that regard but then we don't get to bothered by other things which might distress a partner to be asked to emulate.

Lifestyle programs and womens mags featuring expensive houses, furniture and holidays is one that springs to mind. How many marriages have been wrecked by one party always wanting more and creating pressure (emotional and or financial) in pursuit of it." (Quote:R0bert)

I just noticed this, R0bert. Are you serious? This is a comparison to being asked to say;- copulate with a dog?

What??

Ginx “But THAT little one liner was NOT warranted and not appreciated.”

Oh, the delicate little petals are bruised.

Phone Beyond Blue or someone who actually cares

Ginx, "This is a comparison to being asked to say;- copulate with a dog?"

No I'd not thought along that lines. I think that's illegal but I'm not sure where watching porn about it fits into the legal spectrum.

I was thinking in terms a lot closer to the norm. About being more adventurous within existing sexual orientation.

As with any stance against further government control there are extremes which don't fit well. To me it seems a bit like the anti-abortion crowd refering to women using abortion because they couldn't be bothered with contraception, there may be cases like that but they don't represent the norm or the bulk of those impacted if the case for greater loss of freedom is won.

Don't tell me the sources but how often have you had different women tell you of requests which were that extreme? I'd hope that it's rare.

If the debate was just about limiting access to pornographic material depicting illegal acts I'd not be overly interested (although the point made about Japanese porn and sexual assault rates is relevant).

Whilst you are ambivalent about censorship many of those attacking porn think they have the right to try and control what others do with their bodies. The right to impose their interpretations of their chosen gods views on those who don't hold a belief in their god.

Others why cry foul at men commenting on abortion because "it's my body my choice" and then advocate for the imposition of censorship on what men choose to do with their bodies.

R0bert

I am not anti-porn, however I am concerned at the way women are portrayed in MOST porn.

Spot the hypocrisy:

The hetero male contingent on OLO claim that porn is all harmless fun. That the images of women portrayed as basic objects for men, is not at all harmful, actually reduces the incidence of rape, and does not reinforce sexual stereotypes at all. Besides the women are consenting adults aren’t they?

In the highly lucrative world of advertising, stereotyping is common as it panders to our needs, desires and fantasies to sell everything from chocolates to cars. I recall R0bert on many occasions complaining about the portrayal of men as buffoons as being detrimental to male well-being. And he is not alone. There is a plethora of research of the impact of stereotyping of both men and women in advertising. Many men are not happy about these images.

But it sells. Advertising works. Whether we admit it or not advertising feeds both our conscious and sub-conscious desires.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/09/18/1063625153160.html

“John Marsden, the best-selling adolescents' fiction writer, and author of the non-fiction books Secret Men's Business and The Boy You Brought Home, said, "Teenage boys are among the most maligned group in our society ...
"The media portrays them as either drug-crazed, illiterate, unemployable, suicidal, failures at school, sex criminals or vandals. So adults tend to treat them more suspiciously, and that causes them [unconsciously] to become angry or frustrated or alienated."
The Advertising Standards Bureau, one of the few organisations that measures complaints about stereotypes in the media, reports a steady increase in the percentage of men (now more than a third) complaining about advertising, and their most frequent complaint is about sexual discrimination.”

If the way we portray men and women in advertising can be harmful – why would porn displaying rape scenes, gang bangs or any other demeaning sex act be any different? It is not about consent; it is about the limited view of sexuality that hetero male preferences are the norm and therefore acceptable no matter how demeaning this limited sexuality is to women.

Fractelle, "The hetero male contingent on OLO claim that porn is all harmless fun." - I've not noticed anybody saying that it's all harmless fun. That's a strawman claim to allow you to rebut what you would like others to believe we are saying. I expected better from you on that.

I am saying that the evidence appears to be that increased access to porn has reduced the incidence of sexual assault. Stats based claims rather than emotive impressions and I've provided a link to the material as has Col to a study from a different part of the world.

The Porn Book discussed elsewhere has rebutted the assumtion that the bulk of porn shows women "as basic objects for men"

The more extreme porn does reinforce stereotypes and mindsets which I don't like but so does almost every magazine in the waiting room of my doctors surgery and near the checkout's at Woolies let alone much of what's on prime time TV slots.

TurnRightThenLeft posted a piece recently that says better than I can say it my views on trying to force others to a particular way of thinking.

Research is showing that mainstream porn is not as portrayed all to often by the anti-porn crowd and the statistical evidence is showing a clear correlation between improved access to porn and reduced rates of sexual assaults.

I don't like the portrayal of violence against men as acceptable in advertising. My choice is to avoid the products of those companies who use that advertising slant.

I've never much liked abortion but have accepted that women should have control over what they do with their own bodies regardless of my own misgivings. That the dangers to society of not accepting that freedom far outweigh my concerns.

Why is it that so many women appear to be unwilling to accept that men and some other women should also have control over what they do with their bodies?

R0bert

TB; It's OK dear. I understand.
________________________

R0bert; I need to search out some data, and refer to a third party. I'll get back to you.

Fractelle, great post.

RObert, I don't understand what you mean by your comment "Why is it that so many women appear to be unwilling to accept that men and some other women should also have control over what they do with their bodies?".

Where has anyone said that men can't control what they do with their bodies? What has this got to do with the images portrayed in violent porn where women (and sometimes men) are demeaned such as in rape scenes etc.

As to other comments, no-one is telling people how they should think. We are all just spouting opinions which is what this forum is all about.

I am not proposing a blanket ban on all porn or totalitarian censorship, but I won't pretend that violent porn is not damaging nor that it has consequences such as outlined in the "Little Children Are Sacred" report and the influence rampant porn is having in some communities.

However, I do believe there has to be a limit on what is available on the Net. It is easy to insist parents should monitor what their children are doing on the Net, but frankly if you think this is even remotely achievable then let other parents in on the secret.

Often both parents are working and not home when their children come home from school or they are exposed to it at friend's home where parents may not be as vigilant about filters. Even schools have had porn slip in under the radar despite filters.

I have spoken to my kids openly about sex and about porn sites given we have a computer at home. Let's face it sex is fun and desirable. Soft porn that portrays two mutually consenting adults enjoying sex is not, I would think, going to do 'harm' but lets not get side tracked about this sort of porn as opposed to violent porn, which is what we are really on about.

Well,-data is checked and I spoke to two women.

MY conclusions?:

Pornography has NO effect on the behaviour of SOME men towards women.

Pornography CAN enhance SOME relationships.

And ;-without any shadow of a doubt;-pornography DOES and HAS influenced the behaviour of SOME men to SOME women in the most graphically violent way.

One of the women I spoke to has a permanent disability as a DIRECT result of her lack of 'understanding and cooperation'.

This was difficult to revisit. I will NOT be expanding on the above.

(You know;....given the intelligence of most on OLO, I'm surprised that we all(inclusive), go with the 'one size fits all' logic. One of these brave women wanted me to put the first two paragraphs, because she accepts that they may have validity. Given what happened to her, I admire her stance).

Ginx, I'm in complete agreement with your conclusions.

Combined with my beliefs in personal choice and stats which show that overall the rates of sexual violence have declined as access to porn has got easier I'm against increased censorship for adults access to porn.

The law (and or mental health facilities) should deal with those who use porn as a motivator for harm to others.

Pelican, one of the problems with this discussion is that we are arguing on many fronts at once and it's not always clear just how far peoples objections go.

Some may be just trying to point out problems they see with porn, others are pushing a pro censorship line. I've had the impression that some feminists contribiting to this discssuion (and in broader debate) would like to see stronger censorship of porn.

I may be wrong about that.

R0bert