Article View: oh.general
Article #18Re: Some References to Studies Re: Is Pornography Harmful?
From: J Greely
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1992 19:02
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 1992 19:02
94 lines
5092 bytes
5092 bytes
In article <1992Aug6.162859.27637@icd.ab.com> adnan@icd.ab.com (Adnan C. Yaqub) writes: >Possibly it is a situation where some people are more adversely >affected by pornography than others. Your capsule summaries of the studies referenced do not appear to support this causal link. Studying the hobbies of sex offenders doesn't support a porn->rape link, just a rape->porn link. The two non-criminal studies are not clearly explained in your summaries. >Obviously, from this post and my previous post you can see that I am >closer to the latter statement than, say, J. Greely. ...whose position on the whole thing is basically "put up or shut up". I'll look up these papers when I get a chance, but I'm not holding my breath. >This study exposed subjects to no, a moderate amount, and massive >amounts of *non-violent* pornography. The subjects were then asked to >recommend a prison sentence for a man convicted of raping a female >hitchhiker. An interesting study, which seems to have been designed to reinforce the experimenter's bias. Why this particular "test"? How did he choose his samples? Were they given information on normal sentencing guidelines for such a crime, or gauged for their previous knowledge of common sentences for rape? How were the subjects selected (general population, volunteers, judges, parents, etc)? >The results were something like: Are these means, medians, or something else? >>2) A high percentage of all sex crimes (rape, child abuse, etc.) have >>pornography involved, during and/or immediately before. >One result of the Silbert-Pines study is that of the women >(prostitutes who had been raped) 24% said, without being asked, that >their attacker had specifically mentioned his use of pornography as he >raped them. That does not support your conclusion that "pornography" was involved during and/or immediately before the crime, only that they liked the stuff. I'd be surprised if they didn't also talk about tight pants and deep cleavage. >Similar, 22% who had been molested as children said that >the molester either used pornography or mentioned it during the crime. Did they define what the molester considered "pornography", such as Sears catalogs, teen magazines, or (Bundy's favorite) cheerleader magazines? This, of course, doesn't support your assertion that "pornography" *causes* these behaviors, simply that people practicing these behaviors are attracted to "porn". At this point, you're still arguing that flies cause garbage. >Zillmann, D. and Bryant, J. "Pornography's Impact on Sexual >Satisfaction", Journal of Applied Social Psychology", 1988. > >This study found that exposure to *non-violent* pornography diminished >people's satisfaction with their sexual partner's physical appearance, >affection, curiosity, and sexual performance. Thank you for clarifying your remark. What was their methodology? Were they testing for short-term or long-term results? I wouldn't be surprised if the sight of a dozen nude athletes practicing the old in-out-in-out temporarily made your current partner look a bit grubby, but if there is a long-term effect, Sports Illustrated must be breaking up a lot of marriages. Perhaps someone should buy a copy of Penthouse's subscription list, and see how many subscribers have committed rapes or gotten divorced after they started their subscriptions. Of course, if it failed to turn up anything, porn-banners would simply insist that rapists buy at the newsstand... >I have no statistics on hand about the amount of child pornography in >the U.S. I don't believe that the U.S. Customs Office "produces" >child pornography. They probably buy it for their investigations. Nope. They repackage it, advertise it, and send it out through the mail, in attempts to arrest buyers. I'll dig up my references on this one. "The distorted images of animals displayed in the media, language, advertising, and cartoons, distorts and degrades animals. Is this not another form of pornography?" -- Feminists for Animal Rights, quoted in the _New Republic_. -- J Greely (jgreely@cis.ohio-state.edu; osu-cis!jgreely)
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<JGREELY.92Aug6140214@morganucodon.cis.ohio-state.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!dtix!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!morganucodon.cis.ohio-state.edu!jgreelyReferences:
<1992Aug4.195135.20919@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> <ADNAN.92Aug5081635@redstart.icd.ab.com> <JGREELY.92Aug5133543@morganucodon.cis.ohio-state.edu> <1992Aug6.162859.27637@icd.ab.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!dtix!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!morganucodon.cis.ohio-state.edu!jgreely From: jgreely@morganucodon.cis.ohio-state.edu (J Greely) Newsgroups: oh.general,misc.legal Subject: Re: Some References to Studies Re: Is Pornography Harmful? Message-ID: <JGREELY.92Aug6140214@morganucodon.cis.ohio-state.edu> Date: 6 Aug 92 19:02:14 GMT References: <1992Aug4.195135.20919@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> <ADNAN.92Aug5081635@redstart.icd.ab.com> <JGREELY.92Aug5133543@morganucodon.cis.ohio-state.edu> <1992Aug6.162859.27637@icd.ab.com> Sender: news@cis.ohio-state.edu (NETnews ) Organization: Ohio State University Computer and Information Science Lines: 94 In-Reply-To: adnan@icd.ab.com's message of Thu, 6 Aug 1992 16: 28:59 GMT Originator: jgreely@morganucodon.cis.ohio-state.edu