resturt.

My problem with you wwm is this isn't really about controlling what your kids see, is it? It can't be, because you can already do that. It is about controlling how I choose to parent my kids. My response is ugly, but there is no polite way to say it: piss off.Posted by rstuart, Saturday, 19 December 2009 3:02:58 PM

LOL. Me telling you how to bring up your children? I don't even know you! let alone care, that's your biz. Its the junk we all agree that's rubbish. I have out lined my point, which was very clear, and if these intervenus underwear vultures- (meaning addicted to this type of material) was ever to get into the hands of any of the so call innocence we claim to respect and protect, and I guess when you walk down the street and see the youth acting like Americans and all the other copy-cat stuff their adopting, and this don't concern you at all? Well buddy, It concerns me! Ive got five myself From 9 to 18 and all know how to switch off the filler, either by own no-how or helped by request of other siblings, so its not safe because the youth out smart us by a 100 to one.

Its just my opinion to the fact, that's all. No I say, but at the moment the law is on your side. Human-beings since the cave days have enjoyed the bonkings of others and in all honesty, the wild thing is as normal as farting. As for mags and alike, again your biz! Dont have that stuff in my house or have the need for it.

The wife and I make our own porn, and behold, its very good. smile.

I will say it again! Its the crap! and nothing more.

examinator: "Evidence suggests there are more who may benefit than those who won't."

That statement is the essence of the problem. You claim there is evidence to show this. What evidence? Show me some evidence that correlates internet availability with harms. Not one off examples. Not anecdotes from workers who "just know". Real life aggregate stats from a reasonable population size that show internet usage when up, and so did harms to some group. The internet has been around for decades now, so there there has been more than enough time for such evidence to accumulate.

Except there isn't any to be found, is there? It didn't happen, did it? This means what you claim just isn't true. It is in fact a lie, yet is is repeated over and over again, seemingly getting stronger with every repetition. Its power comes it being a wonderful sound bite, and "common sense" makes you think it should be true. This makes it an ideal lie when you are trying use it to control the behaviour of others.

Here is an interesting list:

France: The total ban of a movie has ... fallen in obsolescence, although it is still legally possible. No such ban has been decided for more than twenty years. http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/41535/20080828-1334/www.classification.gov.au/resource6b64.pdf?resource=253&filename=253.pdf

Sweden: "framework of regulation .. not used very often – by the Swedish Board not really since 1995" http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/41535/20080828-1334/www.classification.gov.au/resource58fc.pdf?resource=259&filename=259.pdf

Norway:"Norway's national film board has lifted a ban on hundreds of films censored for sex or violence since 1913" http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3154766.stm

If what you said is true, countries like the above that have largely done away with censorship should have started to see a growing problem. Only they don't.

walk with me: "Me telling you how to bring up your children? I don't even know you! let alone care, that's your biz."

I am glad we have that straight. So I take it you don't care what what my kids see in my house, and thus you don't have any intention of controlling it with say a mandatory filter? Excellent! We are on the same page.

walk with me: "acting like Americans and all the other copy-cat stuff their adopting, and this don't concern you at all?"

Let me get this straight - you are claiming if people see something on the internet, a portion will rush out and "copy it"? Do I have that right?

You will get no argument from me that since the internet has arrived, the availability images and movies showing of porn and violence has grown immensely. So according to you, now people have been seeing it for the last decade they should be copying it. That should not be hard to prove. Just pulling up the ABS statistics showing a sharp rise in people copy-cating crimes depicted on the internet.

But of course you can't show that, because if didn't happen. What we are in fact discussing is some fantasy of yours. And to answer your question - no, your fantasies don't concern me at all. Except when you try to use them to justify controlling what I can and can't see. Then they concern me a great deal.

Rstuart. No,No, you misunderstood me. When I said we make our own porn, I meant without the lens. Memory only. You talk of fantasy not causing damage on the Internet, I beg the differ. There are lots of evidence to this like confessions of serial killers, rapist, and such, but as you said, only the small minority, still one to many in the eyes of the victims.

Going to play golf right now, I will continue later.

And don't forget your sight contradiction in your last posts..

Back this after-noon.

walk with me: "No,No, you misunderstood me. When I said we make our own porn, I meant without the lens."

Not sure how I managed to create that impression. I understood what you meant.

walk with me: "There are lots of evidence to this like confessions of serial killers, rapist, and such"

Yes, wwm, that is the usual argument given to show porn harms people. The problem is it is, when you come back from golf, you will give me a series of one off examples to make your case. But one off examples don't prove that porn is on the balance, harmful.

Perhaps an example will help make it clear why not. There is no doubt that vaccinations kill. Some people get allergic reaction to them and die. What is worse, it is possible they may never have caught the original disease, so they seemingly die for no good reason. By the "if we can save just one death, we should stop (insert you favourite cause here)" reasoning we should stop vaccinations. But of course that is obviously just silly. Even though vaccinations undoubtedly kill people, they save many more then they kill. Stopping them would do more harm than good.

It is not so clear cut with porn. Firstly, where is is clear vaccinations do kill some people, we don't really know for sure if porn was a contributing cause to a given crime. Sure criminals may say "the porn made me do it", but the also say "the booze made me do it", or "the devil made me do it", or even "society made me do it".

Secondly, the evidence that porn is harmful is ambiguous. Yes, people who do certain types of crime are highly attracted to it. But people who renovate cars are attracted to car magazines, people who fly planes are attracted to aviation magazines but no one would say they do those things because they read the magazines. Rather, there is some underlying cause that attracts them to both flying and magazines about flying.
(cont'd....)

(...cont'd)
It is likely to be that way with porn too. In fact, there is some evidence that points to these people using porn as a substitute for doing the real thing, which they try to avoid because they know it is bad. So there is evidence porn could actually reduce harms, not increase them.

Back to your claim you have examples, such as confessions. It may be true porn has harmed some, it may be true it has saved some from harm. Unlike vaccines it is very difficult to say for sure even for a particular incident. Thus the statement "single examples prove nothing" is even more true for porn then it is for vaccines. But just like vaccines, that doesn't matter. What matters, is on balance, did things get worse or better?

Fortunately it isn't hard to check this for porn. We had a time 20 years or so ago when there was no internet porn. Now we are flooded with it, with everybody free to see as much (or as little) of it as they like. To make your case, all you have to do is name a selection criminal acts you say porn contributes to, and then show they have had a large, unambiguous increase in them over the past 20 years. Crimes are great for this sort of thing because we have hard, reliable statistics gathers by various government departments. And if porn is as bad as you say, the huge uptick in availability of porn should have caused a corresponding huge uptick in the related crime rates and thus be really easy to spot.

So there is my challenge to you. You want to control what goes on in my household. Fine. All I ask in return is before you do so, you show what I do in private has some material effect on you. It is not an unreasonable request.