To Porn or not To Porn? That is the Question

[Scyobayrynn]

Point made, I would politely ask you to not drag something so sacred to some as their religious beliefs into it...but you had to take it to where it could go given the logic you were given to work with.

Perhaps somewhat ironically, I do find the cross repugnant.

Even without the pagan religious symbolism aspect, It's sort of like watching your wrongfully convicted father get executed via electrocution by agents of his enemies and then venerating the electric chair.

It's very much like that, except your wrongfully accused father did it so you wouldn't have to and now the electric chair is there to remind you of the sacrifice he made for you... Perspective. But again, I understand. You didn't make the framework for his logic, you just showed him what fit in it.

I also appreciate your courteous response. I'm derailing.

Legal, consenual, with strict oversight to ensure both formers.

[Galloism]

This is from a university psychology class. It features debates on human sexuality and provides sources both for and against topics. You have chosen links only the "yes" category, which completely circumvents the actual debate and is patently dishonest.

Links by Threlizdun were all in favor of pornography, mine are all against...and your point is?

Of course, his links involved actual science instead of a talk show host interviewing a Rabbi.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Links by Threlizdun were all in favor of pornography, mine are all against...and your point is?

You're really annoying. I don't like your sarcasm.

No one cares.

Sarcasm is by and large more common than calm, reasoned, educated debate on this forum.

[Rhyfelnydd]

see the result you get by demanding... treat others and all that

No need to act so wise.

He really isn't. He is basically speaking common sense.

[Scyobayrynn]

see the result you get by demanding... treat others and all that

No need to act so wise.

No need not to.

[United States of White America]

You're really annoying. I don't like your sarcasm.

No one cares.

Sarcasm is by and large more common than calm, reasoned, educated debate on this forum.

And why is that?

[Rhyfelnydd]

No one cares.

Sarcasm is by and large more common than calm, reasoned, educated debate on this forum.

And why is that?

Because it is the internet. Such things abound here. No real reason.

[United States of White America]

And why is that?

Because it is the internet. Such things abound here. No real reason.

Such as pornography. It's of the devil.

[Galloism]

Because it is the internet. Such things abound here. No real reason.

Such as pornography. It's of the devil.

There is such a thing as angel/devil porn. FYI.

[United States of White America]

Such as pornography. It's of the devil.

There is such a thing as angel/devil porn. FYI.

That's blasphemy.

[Rhyfelnydd]

Because it is the internet. Such things abound here. No real reason.

Such as pornography. It's of the devil.

Right. I would love to see old Beelz come up with that plan in hell: "Now I shall create a harmless media that depicts sexual activity for people to please themselves to! Aha! truly I am evil for such dastardly creations!"

[Aggicificicerous]

This is from a university psychology class. It features debates on human sexuality and provides sources both for and against topics. You have chosen links only the "yes" category, which completely circumvents the actual debate and is patently dishonest.

Links by Threlizdun were all in favor of pornography, mine are all against...and your point is?

Links by Threlizdun were to scientific studies. Meanwhile, "THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE LINK EVER" gives a bunch of outdated opinion pieces and ignores the contrary articles that were intended to accompany it. Perhaps you should have titled it "A moderately comprehensive link fifteen years ago".

[Rhyfelnydd]

There is such a thing as angel/devil porn. FYI.

That's blasphemy.

No, it's erotic.

[Galloism]

There is such a thing as angel/devil porn. FYI.

That's blasphemy.

True.

If you wanted something historical, you'd need a male angel and a human woman. Probably porn of that too.

[United States of White America]

That's blasphemy.

No, it's erotic.

Same. Thing.

[Chessmistress]

Links by Threlizdun were all in favor of pornography, mine are all against...and your point is?

Of course, his links involved actual science instead of a talk show host interviewing a Rabbi.

You should know Galloism that you cannot be a TERF, since you're a male...

First link I posted linked to 10 serious scientific links.
Other links ADD further value: perspective must be holistic.

I would accept criticism if I would have linked just only to Oprah and similars.
But linking to science + to Oprah is BETTER than linking just only to science: it's a more holistic perspective.
Stop strawmanning.

[United States of White America]

You should know Galloism that you cannot be a TERF, since you're a male...

I thought I was bigoted.

[Galloism]

Of course, his links involved actual science instead of a talk show host interviewing a Rabbi.

You should know Galloism that you cannot be a TERF, since you're a male...

First link I posted linked to 10 serious scientific links.
Other links ADD further value: perspective must be holistic.

I would accept criticism if I would have linked just only to Oprah and similars.
But linking to science + to Oprah is BETTER than linking just only to science: it's a more holistic perspective.
Stop strawmanning.

I'm not. I went through your links. There's only one piece of a scientific study in the whole thing. And even that isn't conclusive.

Observe:

Something about negative effects of pornography - note, it's not just only medical, it's also cultural
Please check ALL the links I post, thank you: it's the global picture that counts, do not dare to say "it's just only Oprah"!
There are a lot of feminist sources but also non-feminist sources here!

THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE LINK EVER

http://www.csun.edu/~psy453/porno_y.htm

The source only has one link that, ostensibly, goes to actual scientific studies.

And the link is broken.

OTHER LINKS, MORE VARIEGATED

http://www.oprah.com/relationships/The- ... ts-of-Porn

Oprah interviews... a Rabbi? Is this scientific? Is it the hat?

http://www.xxxchurch.com/thehaps/7-negative-effects-of-porn.html

Provides no links to any actual scientific studies, with a quote from a book about a study which is not cited, so we can't examine the study to see what it was really about.

http://familyshare.com/10-toxic-side-effects-of-pornography-use

Cites no studies. Makes lots of unsubstantiated claims.

http://www.dianarussell.com/articles.html#pornographyingeneral

Several studies here - most having to do with child pornography which is pretty much universally agreed to be bad. However, there are a few here...

This one which is cited provides lots of theory, but very little in the way of actual evidence. She does, fairly, point out some correlation back in the 80s between those who claimed they "would like to rape a woman" and those who read pornography (hey, it was the 80s - people read pornography). However, causation is elusive. The question is if those who are more sexually violent use pornography to sate their urges, or if the pornography causes such violence.

The author, it seems, has not even considered the first possibility.

http://www.dianarussell.com/porn_as_a_c ... _rape.html

The rest seems to have to do with feminist views on pornography, about which I couldn't possibly give less of a damn.

FEMINIST SITES AGAINST PORNOGRAPHY

https://againstpornography.org/

http://www.oneangrygirl.net/antiporn.html

Not even, unless you are going to link to actual science somewhere.

INTERVIEW TO GAIL DINES AT CNN

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew-ba ... ts-society

She makes lots of claims, but cites no actual science.

[Aggicificicerous]

No, it's erotic.

Same. Thing.

That makes it all the hotter.

[Galloism]

You should know Galloism that you cannot be a TERF, since you're a male...

I thought I was bigoted.

Don't sell yourself short. You still can be.

Chess just displays sexist bigotry in a different direction that's all.

[United States of White America]

I thought I was bigoted.

Don't sell yourself short. You still can be.

Chess just displays sexist bigotry in a different direction that's all.

I'm bigoted towards atheists, but never towards women.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

There is such a thing as angel/devil porn. FYI.

That's blasphemy.

I don't know about you, but I can't get out of the house in the morning without at least one cigarette, a couple cups of coffee, and no less than four blasphemous statements, as well as a "Hail Satan" for good measure.

[Rhyfelnydd]

No, it's erotic.

Same. Thing.

Sexual attraction is blasphemy? Wait, what?

[United States of White America]

Same. Thing.

Sexual attraction is blasphemy? Wait, what?

Chastity is the only thing natural.

[Rhyfelnydd]

Sexual attraction is blasphemy? Wait, what?

Chastity is the only thing natural.

Are....are you serious? Wow. I...wow. Do...do you not know how reproduction works? Or libido? Or any kind of human physical and mental processes?