The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Why no federal government study on pornography?

Why no federal government study on pornography?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 11
  7. 12
  8. 13
  9. Page 14
  10. 15
  11. 16
  12. All
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.
Posted by Col Rouge, Tuesday, 8 April 2008 4:08:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
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
Posted by R0bert, Tuesday, 8 April 2008 6:12:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"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!
Posted by Ginx, Tuesday, 8 April 2008 6:30:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
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?)
Posted by Col Rouge, Tuesday, 8 April 2008 6:55:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"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.
Posted by Ginx, Tuesday, 8 April 2008 10:58:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
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.
Posted by Col Rouge, Wednesday, 9 April 2008 12:20:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 11
  7. 12
  8. 13
  9. Page 14
  10. 15
  11. 16
  12. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy