|
|
|
Wikipedia, porn, religion and politics!, Wikipedia, porn, religion and politics! |
|
|
Mooby |
|
Neophyte
Group: Contributors
Posts: 18
Joined:
Member No.: 76,737
|
I'm confused. Santorum says that pornography contributes to misogyny, but the rest of it seems to imply he's against pornography.
-Mooby
|
|
|
|
lilburne |
|
Chameleon
Group: Contributors
Posts: 890
Joined:
Member No.: 21,803
|
QUOTE(Silver seren @ Fri 16th March 2012, 11:20pm) Um...I thought there were studies that showed that pornography actually decreased incidences of crimes like rape?
He seems to be saying the exact opposite. (With nothing to support his statements, obviously)
Is this like "More Guns Less Crime"? What number of hours of porn should the average person in society be watching for the maximum reduction in rape rates? Given that some quite young kids (12 or so) have been found guilty of rape, what age in your opinion should we start showing kids porn? Should they be familiarized with it by age 10 or younger, or older? What type of porn should they be watching straight, gay, or other? Should they be educated into the bondage scene too?
|
|
|
|
RMHED |
|
Ãœber Member
Group: Regulars
Posts: 936
Joined:
Member No.: 11,716
|
QUOTE(lilburne @ Fri 16th March 2012, 11:46pm) QUOTE(Silver seren @ Fri 16th March 2012, 11:20pm) Um...I thought there were studies that showed that pornography actually decreased incidences of crimes like rape?
He seems to be saying the exact opposite. (With nothing to support his statements, obviously)
Is this like "More Guns Less Crime"? What number of hours of porn should the average person in society be watching for the maximum reduction in rape rates? Given that some quite young kids (12 or so) have been found guilty of rape, what age in your opinion should we start showing kids porn? Should they be familiarized with it by age 10 or younger, or older? What type of porn should they be watching straight, gay, or other? Should they be educated into the bondage scene too? Show and tell could become very problematic.
|
|
|
|
jsalsman |
|
New Member
Group: Contributors
Posts: 46
Joined:
Member No.: 76,279
|
QUOTE(Ottava @ Fri 16th March 2012, 6:01pm) All studies prove that porn makes you de-sensitized to sex so you need more and more, or more risky kinds. [citation needed]
|
|
|
|
Somey |
|
Can't actually moderate (or even post)
Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,816
Joined:
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275
|
QUOTE(lilburne @ Fri 16th March 2012, 7:57pm) He read it on wikipedia. Oh its gotta be TRUE! There are just so many different variables in highly-qualitative studies like the ones people do on pornography - hardcore vs. softcore, viewer demographics, what acts are depicted, professional vs. amateur, the whole nine yards. Ottava is actually right about porn studies that examine the issue in terms of how it affects children, including pre-adolescents. And many, if not most, academic studies have concluded that heavy exposure to porn makes people roughly 20 percent more likely to become sexually aggressive, with a similar percentage increase in the commission of sexual offenses (including rape). However, there have also been studies suggesting (maybe even "proving," though who can say really) that "casual" (i.e., not-so-heavy) exposure is not only not harmful, but beneficial to some people - particularly those who don't already have aggressive behavioral tendencies. So, unsurprisingly, porn ends up being like a lot of vices, such as alcohol, tobacco, or certain narcotics - OK in small doses, very nasty and dangerous in high doses. IMO the problem with Rick Santorum's approach is, like Mr. RMHED suggests, he's really only bringing up the issue for votes and he'd do nothing about it if he were actually elected. It may be that he couldn't do anything about it, given the degree to which the courts currently control the issue (for better or worse). It's likely that nothing short of a constitutional amendment would give him the power he'd need, or want, to crack down to the extent he's talking about.
|
|
|
|
Vigilant |
|
Senior Member
Group: Contributors
Posts: 307
Joined:
Member No.: 8,684
|
QUOTE(Ottava @ Sat 17th March 2012, 12:01am) QUOTE(Silver seren @ Fri 16th March 2012, 7:20pm) Um...I thought there were studies that showed that pornography actually decreased incidences of crimes like rape?
Where did you hallucinate that? All studies prove that porn makes you de-sensitized to sex so you need more and more, or more risky kinds. The claim that not having something makes you want it more has never been proven, and is always shown to be 100% opposite of what is true. ALL STUDIES PROVE... Your ignorance is astounding. Furthermore, what the hell do *you* know about sex in any form?
|
|
|
|
Silver seren |
|
Senior Member
Group: Contributors
Posts: 470
Joined:
Member No.: 36,940
|
QUOTE(Ottava @ Sat 17th March 2012, 12:01am) QUOTE(Silver seren @ Fri 16th March 2012, 7:20pm) Um...I thought there were studies that showed that pornography actually decreased incidences of crimes like rape?
Where did you hallucinate that? All studies prove that porn makes you de-sensitized to sex so you need more and more, or more risky kinds. The claim that not having something makes you want it more has never been proven, and is always shown to be 100% opposite of what is true. I'll give you the de-sensitized to sex part, but you'll need to prove the risky kinds. From what i've been seeing in a quick search is that desensitization did occur, but it did not result in increased interest in new sexual practices outside the norm. And I think that this is the study I was remembering. For those who don't want to read through all of that, there's quite a few news articles reporting on the study. http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/everyda...vents_rape.htmlOh, hey! There's a news article from yesterday that says Santorum is wrong because of that study. http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-03...ntorum-internet
|
|
|
|
Silver seren |
|
Senior Member
Group: Contributors
Posts: 470
Joined:
Member No.: 36,940
|
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Sat 17th March 2012, 1:29am) QUOTE(Silver seren @ Sat 17th March 2012, 1:17am) And I think that this is the study I was remembering. At a glance, it looks like Kendell – an economist – has used internet access as a proxy for pornography consumption. If you read the Slate article, it says, "And, according to Clemson professor Todd Kendall, the effects remain even after you control for all of the obvious confounding variables, such as alcohol consumption, police presence, poverty and unemployment rates, population density, and so forth. OK, so we can at least tentatively conclude that Net access reduces rape. But that's a far cry from proving that porn access reduces rape. Maybe rape is down because the rapists are all indoors reading Slate or vandalizing Wikipedia. But professor Kendall points out that there is no similar effect of Internet access on homicide. It's hard to see how Wikipedia can deter rape without deterring other violent crimes at the same time. On the other hand, it's easy to imagine how porn might serve as a substitute for rape."
|
|
|
|
barney |
|
Neophyte
Group: Contributors
Posts: 6
Joined:
Member No.: 76,900
|
QUOTE(RMHED @ Fri 16th March 2012, 11:39pm) Will Santorum ban Wikipedia? No
Will Santorum ban the distribution of hardcore pornography? No
Will Santorum bolster his appeal to conservative voters by taking this stance? Yes
Agree, except for last bit. Santorum doesn't know about Wikipedia, and I don't think he really cares about it. I mean, really. Let's not get ahead of ourselves.
|
|
|
|
lilburne |
|
Chameleon
Group: Contributors
Posts: 890
Joined:
Member No.: 21,803
|
QUOTE(Silver seren @ Sat 17th March 2012, 1:17am) And I think that this is the study I was remembering. For those who don't want to read through all of that, there's quite a few news articles reporting on the study. You should be aware of this which I posted to before: http://www.crab.rutgers.edu/~goertzel/mythsofmurder.htmIt applies to all such 'studies' and those from an economic background are particularly prone to falling foul of it: which is why it is called 'econometrics'. The executive summary is that these models don't work for economics where they were designed and there is no evidence to assume that they work for social issues for which they weren't designed. They are either so simplistic that anyone can see the flaw in the model immediately, or so complex that any slight change in the data will give you the opposite result from that reported. For example if you choice your start or end point to be a month earlier or later, or if you picked a slightly different population group IOW they are the type of junk science that is so beloved by the media.
|
|
|
|
timbo |
|
Member
Group: Contributors
Posts: 102
Joined:
Member No.: 21,141
|
QUOTE(Silver seren @ Fri 16th March 2012, 4:20pm) Um...I thought there were studies that showed that pornography actually decreased incidences of crimes like rape?
He seems to be saying the exact opposite. (With nothing to support his statements, obviously)
Santorum is running a faith-based campaign. Don't let any of that secular scientific method stuff get in the way of a good bible story... t
|
|
|
|
iii |
|
Member
Group: Contributors
Posts: 114
Joined:
Member No.: 38,992
|
QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Sat 17th March 2012, 11:23pm) QUOTE(timbo @ Sun 18th March 2012, 2:39am) Santorum is running a faith-based campaign.
As opposed to who? Mitt Romney. Or, at least, his campaign is not overtly Mormon. (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif)
|
|
|
|
Web Fred |
|
Pervert & Swinger
Group: Contributors
Posts: 739
Joined:
From: Manchester, UK
Member No.: 17,141
|
QUOTE(iii @ Sun 18th March 2012, 4:11am) QUOTE(Proabivouac @ Sat 17th March 2012, 11:23pm) QUOTE(timbo @ Sun 18th March 2012, 2:39am) Santorum is running a faith-based campaign.
As opposed to who? Mitt Romney. Or, at least, his campaign is not overtly Mormon. (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/laugh.gif) Either way, but it at least is starting to show that that supposed separation between church and state is rapidly getting smaller. Give it a few more decades and there'll be little difference between the US and Iran the only difference will be the direction government officials pray to. Iran -> Mecca USA -> Wall St.
|
|
|
|
Selina |
|
Cat herder
Group: Staffy
Posts: 1,513
Joined:
Member No.: 1
|
(Mod note: Try to stay on topic if possible, this can't really be split effectively to the politics section due to how the issues of politics and religion around this are intertwined, but try to keep it as on topic if possible rather than turning into a total US politics discussion! (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif) And remember when the debate gets heated, attack the arguments not the contributors, a couple of one-liner back and forths removed (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/smile.gif))
|
|
|
|
Web Fred |
|
Pervert & Swinger
Group: Contributors
Posts: 739
Joined:
From: Manchester, UK
Member No.: 17,141
|
QUOTE(mbz1 @ Sun 18th March 2012, 7:25pm) Here's a new article http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/santoru...-163813068.htmlQUOTE As president, Santorum says he would instruct his attorney general to prosecute those who distribute content his administration deems "obscene." Right, that's Iraq and Afghanistan sorted, not to mention the extradition treaty with the UK and how much money is spent by the MPAA on lobbeying.
|
|
|
|
Web Fred |
|
Pervert & Swinger
Group: Contributors
Posts: 739
Joined:
From: Manchester, UK
Member No.: 17,141
|
QUOTE(Ottava @ Sun 18th March 2012, 8:18pm) QUOTE(mbz1 @ Sun 18th March 2012, 3:25pm) Here's a new article http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/santoru...-163813068.htmlQUOTE As president, Santorum says he would instruct his attorney general to prosecute those who distribute content his administration deems "obscene." AKA follow the law. You do know that obscenity laws are still there, and mostly used now to target things like bestiality, child porn, etc. that rightfully should be blocked, right? Define "obscene". I bet you can't do it any better than a religiously motivated politician can. My definitions of obscene rarely include sexual matters.
|
|
|
|
Vigilant |
|
Senior Member
Group: Contributors
Posts: 307
Joined:
Member No.: 8,684
|
QUOTE(Ottava @ Sat 17th March 2012, 2:39pm) QUOTE(jsalsman @ Fri 16th March 2012, 8:56pm) QUOTE(Ottava @ Fri 16th March 2012, 6:01pm) All studies prove that porn makes you de-sensitized to sex so you need more and more, or more risky kinds. [citation needed] A simple internet search on de-sensitization with porn will show you that. It is the same with any chemical addiction, and porn is connected to chemical addictions you know (hint, sex releases endorphins). In the spirit of more useful communication, http://www.salon.com/2012/03/20/santorums_...ence/singleton/I'd like your response to the dearth of scientific papers that might back your assertion and links to those that you think do back your proposition.
|
|
|
|
jayvdb |
|
Senior Member
Group: Contributors
Posts: 271
Joined:
From: Melbourne, Australia
Member No.: 1,039
|
QUOTE(Ottava @ Sat 17th March 2012, 2:39pm) QUOTE(jsalsman @ Fri 16th March 2012, 8:56pm) QUOTE(Ottava @ Fri 16th March 2012, 6:01pm) All studies prove that porn makes you de-sensitized to sex so you need more and more, or more risky kinds. [citation needed] A simple internet search on de-sensitization with porn will show you that. It is the same with any chemical addiction, and porn is connected to chemical addictions you know (hint, sex releases endorphins). sex is bad ... mkay? Add to the list: Exercise Soothing music Spicy food Sunlight Laughter Tears Sweets Life (hint, endorphins arn't the boogie man)
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
| |