🚀 go-pugleaf

adnan@icd.ab.com (Adnan C. Yaqub) writes:

[...]
: I believe that the
: truth lies somewhere between the two statements "no one is adversely
: affected by pornography" (David Cohen's belief) and "one look at
: pornography will make one a rapist" (probably someone else's belief).
: Possibly it is a situation where some people are more adversely
: affected by pornography than others.

OK....I have no problems with that position.  However, I would tend to
believe that most porn readers are going to be down at the "not affected"
end of the scale.

: J>   Seriously, I'm aware of studies that show some correlation between
: J> _violent_ "pornography" and the effect you claim, but clearly it's the
: J> violence that makes the viewer more accepting of violent acts.  If
: J> true, "First Blood" is much more dangerous than "Christy Canyon and
: J> the All-Star Tit Queens".
: 
: Zillmann, D and Bryant, J. "Pornography, Sexual Callousness, and the
: Trivialization of Rape", Journal of Communication, 1982.

[details elided]

It does seem to show correlation, however correlation does NOT demonstrate
cause-effect relationships.  It's possible, for example, that there is
some third factor that causes both reading/viewing porn and violent sexual
criminal acts.  If this were true, then getting rid of porn will do
nothing to get rid of the cause for the two effects.

Also, the quote provided only demonstrates correlation between desensitization
and viewing porn.  Desensitization is not inherently criminal, and there
is no link shown between desensitization and criminal activity.

[...]

: 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.  Similar, 22% who had been molested as children said that
: the molester either used pornography or mentioned it during the crime.

Again no cause-effect relationship has been shown.  Some molesters/rapists
read pornography.  OK.  Many non-criminals also read pornography too.
So far, you have provided no evidence that porn _causes_ criminal
behaviour.

: 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.

No problems with this.  However, I do have a question: So what?  While
I'm not advocating breaking up relationships, I'd have a much bigger
problem with legislation being passed with the intent to "manage"
people's relationships.... ("Well, we don't think you ought to do
anything that might adversely affect your sex life.")  I consider this
point moot; the government has no right to interfere with people's private
lives, so long as no blatantly criminal activity is going on.
 
: >4) Child pornography, in particular, is very damaging to the children
: >abused during the making of the material.

No problem on the surface...anything that involves children being abused
is going to be damaging to those children.  But what's wrong with
minors who are mature enough to make the decision willingly participating
in the making of an erotic movie?

: >5) Studies indicate that pornography is addicting, with subjects
: >tiring of the "old" and wanting "newer, harder" pornography.

[...]

: I have no studies on hand to back my original assertion, but I will
: keep looking.

I'm willing to concede that pornography might be habit-forming, but I
question the "need to upgrade" part.  Of course, in the US, cigarettes,
caffeine, and alcohol are all habit-forming, yet they are still legal.

--
Michael Adams (aka StarWatcher)
+1 (217) 344-0709, +1 (217) 344-4857
StarWatcher@uiuc.edu (NeXT mail accepted)
wi.5467@wizvax.methuen.ma.us (anon mail)