Should there be more regulation of pornography?

[Moonlit_Angel]

This becomes a matter of (i) nexus and (ii) clear measurability of the harm.

With drugs, you see the needle in the arm and you see the body dead from an overdose.

With porn, the images remain with a person and they may act on them in obvious or subtle ways. Perhaps it takes a personal experience to understand the effects. Until then, we can just hope it doesn't affect us.

Regulating things where it is blatantly obvious as to what will happen anyone who uses it makes sense, because you know full well what the dangers are, and you know that everyone would get those effects.

With porn, however, everyone reacts to that differently. Some see the image and aren't turned on at all. Some see it and are. Some see it as art. Some see it as obscene (yeah, the obscenity thing's gonna be a hard sell here, 80sU2isBest, because what is obscene to one person isn't necessarily obscene to others. Some people find the Bible obscene. Would you want restrictions on the Bible because of the way some people view it?). So to regulate something that gives off different vibes to different people is a lot harder, and will be much less likely to work.

Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
Taking it away wouldn't make people want it more

The prohibition thing was pointed out-people definitely did go to great lengths to illegally obtain the stuff. Some people saw the monetary value in the stuff, and therefore would go to any lengths possible to obtain the alcohol (and killed anyone who tried to one-up them). And those who loved the drink obviously still wanted it, so they also went to great lengths to get it. And teens who were looking to rebel against their parents would obviously try and find a way to get the stuff and give it a try.

A couple more examples for you-look what happens every time a CD is banned. Sales skyrocket. Why? Because kids still find ways to get the CD, be it from a friend, a shop that didn't cave to the banning rules, nowadays kids can burn the thing off the computer, etc., etc. And for the religious folk, that apple in the garden was forbidden. And did that stop Adam and Eve? Nope.

It's been proven time and time again that people are apt to look at/watch/listen to/read/use things that are forbidden-there's a thrill there in the idea of doing something that is frowned upon by society. Especially if society never really gives a clear-cut reason as to exactly why this thing should be forbidden-not doing that just makes people even more curious. How bad exactly is this thing, anyway, they wonder. And the same thing would happen should porn be restricted or banned.

to everything Irvine and martha and joyfulgirl and them have been saying thus far. Also, a great suggestion you made there earlier, A_Wanderer .

Angela

 

[Irvine511]

another thing that occurred to me: since, as i understand it, many married couples use porn as something of a marital aid, something erotic, much in the way that they might use a dildo, a vibrator, warming lubrication, or anything else they enjoy to spice up their sex life.

are these, then, as harmful as porn? how would porn be different than the things listed above?

let's take the 14 year old boy, or even any single person. chances are, this person masturbates, and possibly masturbates to porn -- the porn, in this situation, being a masturbatory aid like lubrication, kleenex, or even a door with a lock on it. how is porn different from any of these things? to return to an earlier NBC example when he asked if you wanted your daughters to date a boy who had an extensive collection of porn -- would you feel the same way if he had a variety of lubricants, perhaps warming liquid, in order to aid his maturbation? would it bother you if this boy masturbated? (not that you'd ask nor would he tell you ... nor would you ask about the porn nor would he tell you ... these are things you'd have to find out on your own)

 

[80sU2isBest]

but you're still not answering her question.

Yes, I did. I quoted Webster's, which means that is the definition I am going by.

But really, why do I owe her an answer? She loves to whine about me, but doesn't even address it when I call her out on her hypocrisies.

and she's not proposing that you do anything different; you are, however, proposing that some behavior behind closed doors is better or worse than others.

She made the judgment that marriages work better when people don't adopt "rules" such as mine, about porn. That is every bit as much a judgment call as me saying that porn doesn't belong in a marriage. Frankly, I can't understand why you don't see that.

are you willing to say that (1) heterosexual intercourse is better than homosexual intercourse? (2) are you willing to say that sexual intercourse is better than oral sex? are you willing to say that people shouldn't kiss with any tongue?.

You asked for my opinions, so I'm giving them to you. Remember, Martha, he asked, so don't go yelling about it. These are my opinions, based on my belief/faith system.

(1)Heterosex is acceptable to God within the confines of marriage. Outside the confines of marriage it is wrong, just as gay sex is. I think that adultery is the worst.

(2)I have no opinion whatsoever on this.

(3)I have no opinion on this. I personally wouldn't do it until I knew how I felt about the person. Kissing is even serious to me, so I'm not gonna kiss unless I think I'm in love or headed that direction.

 

[Irvine511]

the questions were more rhetorical -- they were meant to point in the direction in which i feel the line of logic was heading.

but thank you for your honesty.

i'll let Martha deal with the rest, but i think there's a difference between saying that people who have rules often set themselves up to fail vs. porn has no place in a marriage.

one is clearly prohibitive and very black and white. the other is not.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

Can I just ask a question to the general audience here? Why exactly are some people in this country so into controlling what consenting people do in the privacy of their bedroom? Maybe I'm just weird, but I've never cared about what a couple does in their bedroom, and I just don't understand why so many others do.

Angela

 

[joyfulgirl]

Can I just ask a question to the general audience here? Why exactly are some people in this country so into controlling what consenting people do in the privacy of their bedroom? Maybe I'm just weird, but I've never cared about what a couple does in their bedroom, and I just don't understand why so many others do.

Angela

Please please please, someone, tell us why.

 

[80sU2isBest]

the questions were more rhetorical -- they were meant to point in the direction in which i feel the line of logic was heading.

but thank you for your honesty.

i'll let Martha deal with the rest, but i think there's a difference between saying that people who have rules often set themselves up to fail vs. porn has no place in a marriage.

one is clearly prohibitive and very black and white. the other is not.

Martha said that those who set up rules -which was clearly directed at the idea of no porn in marraige (since that's what we were talking about) - "end up miserable".

You do not see that as a black and white judgment of what works and what doesn't in a marriage?

 

[80sU2isBest]

Can I just ask a question to the general audience here? Why exactly are some people in this country so into controlling what consenting people do in the privacy of their bedroom? Maybe I'm just weird, but I've never cared about what a couple does in their bedroom, and I just don't understand why so many others do.

Angela

Here's the deal...someone said that porn in marriages wasn't healthy. Someone else said it is. That's what the argument turned into,; that part wasn't about if porn should be regulated in marriages - at least for me it wasn't.

But I am still of the opinion that porn is unhealthy, especially in a marriage and that if someone truly loves and respects his wife, he will have no desire to look at other women naked.

 

[nbcrusader]

Can I just ask a question to the general audience here? Why exactly are some people in this country so into controlling what consenting people do in the privacy of their bedroom? Maybe I'm just weird, but I've never cared about what a couple does in their bedroom, and I just don't understand why so many others do.

Because the affects don't stay in the privacy of the bedroom. Ask the child of a divorced couple (where porn was a causal factor) if this was simply a matter between consenting adults.

Given the sheer volume of pornography available in our society, it is hard to believe it has no negative affects.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

Because the affects don't stay in the privacy of the bedroom. Ask the child of a divorced couple (where porn was a causal factor) if this was simply a matter between consenting adults.

It's still a family matter. I don't know every couple who gets divorced, do I? So it didn't affect society as a whole-until a couple's consenting activities in the bedroom affect society as a whole, why should society care? If a couple is having marital problems, it is up to them and them alone to resolve them, not society.

And besides that, okay, so what of the consenting couples out there who don't have children. Why is it still your business then?

Originally posted by nbcrusader
Given the sheer volume of pornography available in our society, it is hard to believe it has no negative affects.

Still waiting to see some good, hard proof of this. Again, porn only has negative effects if the couple make it into something negative. The porn itself is neutral.

Angela

 

[A_Wanderer]

So, we should probably make guns, drugs and all those other things we don't want people to use abundantly available?

I think we would be smart enough to regulate something and educate the public as to its dangers.

Yes, now your getting it.

 

[nbcrusader]

It's still a family matter. I don't know every couple who gets divorced, do I? So it didn't affect society as a whole-until a couple's consenting activities in the bedroom affect society as a whole, why should society care? If a couple is having marital problems, it is up to them and them alone to resolve them, not society.

What!? Divorce imposes a great burden on society. We just don't want to do anything about it.

[Originally posted by Moonlit_AngelStill waiting to see some good, hard proof of this. Again, porn only has negative effects if the couple make it into something negative. The porn itself is neutral.

Just like guns are neutral as based on your methodology of recognizing harm.

 

[Irvine511]

Martha said that those who set up rules -which was clearly directed at the idea of no porn in marraige (since that's what we were talking about) - "end up miserable".

You do not see that as a black and white judgment of what works and what doesn't in a marriage?

no, i do not.

i see a difference between setting up rules/expectations vs. the banning of something very specific like porn as two different things.

she also mentioned "end up miserable" once -- you've repeated the fact that no man who is in love with his wife would never want to see another woman naked several times.

world of difference there, in my opinion.

 

[Irvine511]

Because the affects don't stay in the privacy of the bedroom. Ask the child of a divorced couple (where porn was a causal factor) if this was simply a matter between consenting adults.

Given the sheer volume of pornography available in our society, it is hard to believe it has no negative affects.

i simply don't think people get divorced because of porn. i think people, especialy women, might want to blame that as a reason, but there are probably much deeper issues than the presence of porn.

a porn addiction, however, is different than the presence of porn -- that's more analagous to alcohol or drug addiction, and as is the case with all addiction, the substance abused is a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself. no one is saying that porn can't be a negative thing, but it's not porn alone that is bad, it is the abuse and misuse of porn that can be a problem.

i would also argue that more kids are affected by alcohol than by porn, more marriages end with alcohol as a factor than porn -- so should we ban alcohol?

 

[Irvine511]

Here's the deal...someone said that porn in marriages wasn't healthy. Someone else said it is. That's what the argument turned into,; that part wasn't about if porn should be regulated in marriages - at least for me it wasn't.

But I am still of the opinion that porn is unhealthy, especially in a marriage and that if someone truly loves and respects his wife, he will have no desire to look at other women naked.

and that is your opinion, and if that's what you believe and that is how you plan to live if you get married, fine by me.

the difference is, i have no problems if you want no porn in your house or never want to look at another woman naked. you, however, have problems with porn in the house of married people and with men who might want to look at Angelina Jolie naked. you are simply in no position to pass such judgements on other people, and any individual would have every right to tell you to piss off if you were to tell him that, if he really loved his wife, then he wouldn't look at Playboy.

 

[nbcrusader]

i simply don't think people get divorced because of porn. i think people, especialy women, might want to blame that as a reason, but there are probably much deeper issues than the presence of porn.

a porn addiction, however, is different than the presence of porn -- that's more analagous to alcohol or drug addiction, and as is the case with all addiction, the substance abused is a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself. no one is saying that porn can't be a negative thing, but it's not porn alone that is bad, it is the abuse and misuse of porn that can be a problem.

i would also argue that more kids are affected by alcohol than by porn, more marriages end with alcohol as a factor than porn -- so should we ban alcohol?

I made a point of using porn as a factor, not the sole cause.

You make a good point regarding alcohol. However, we already do have regulations on the purchase and use of alcohol. So perhaps we can extend those to porn as well.

 

[martha]

I think I might be done here. Clearly our more conservative brethren spend much more time thinking about porn and its consequences than I do. Their vast experience with its horible effects far outweighs my limited experience with its rather limited benefits.

I guess if you don't want to look at other people naked, you don't have to, but why anyone would think that they should be able to tell me that I can't look at other consenting adults naked, well, I don't know.

 

[martha]

You make a good point regarding alcohol. However, we already do have regulations on the purchase and use of alcohol. So perhaps we can extend those to porn as well.

Maybe one last comment.

Perhaps we can have the same restrictions on porn as we do alcohol: restrict its sale to adults.

Oh wait. We already do.

 

[Irvine511]

You make a good point regarding alcohol. However, we already do have regulations on the purchase and use of alcohol. So perhaps we can extend those to porn as well.

we already do.

ack! martha beat me to the punch!

porn is regulated -- i believe that magazines that show full penetration are of a higher cost and less available than magazines that simply show naked bodies.

children cannot buy porn.

there are many kinds of porn that are legal in other places, but not in the US.

what more do you want?

 

[80sU2isBest]

and any individual would have every right to tell you to piss off if you were to tell him that, if he really loved his wife, then he wouldn't look at Playboy.

They have every right to tell me that, and I wouldn't give a rat's behind.

But I would lay odds with you that most people, especially most women, would agree with me that a married man looking at images of naked women other than his wife is a sign that he (a)is not satisfied with his wife and (b) he doesn't respect his wife or his feelings, which is a big indicator that he doesn't love her.

We will always diagree on this Irvine, because we base our ideas about marriage on totally different things. This gets us nowhere.

 

[80sU2isBest]

she also mentioned "end up miserable" once -- you've repeated the fact that no man who is in love with his wife would never want to see another woman naked several times.

world of difference there, in my opinion.

It doesn't matter how many times anyone said anything, Irvine511. What matters is that she made a judgment call against people who believe the way I do and yet at the same time, whined about me making a judgment call about married men looking at naked women other than their wives. It's absolutely outrageous.

 

[nbcrusader]

Maybe one last comment.

Perhaps we can have the same restrictions on porn as we do alcohol: restrict its sale to adults.

Oh wait. We already do.

Do we? Or is that a matter of self-regulation?

 

[Irvine511]

Do we? Or is that a matter of self-regulation?

yes, we do. you must have a credit card for websites, you must show ID for magazines and videos.

it works about as well as keeping alcohol and cigarettes away from minors.

have you any suggestions?

 

[Irvine511]

They have every right to tell me that, and I wouldn't give a rat's behind.

But I would lay odds with you that most people, especially most women, would agree with me that a married man looking at images of naked women other than his wife is a sign that he (a)is not satisfied with his wife and (b) he doesn't respect his wife or his feelings, which is a big indicator that he doesn't love her.

We will always diagree on this Irvine, because we base our ideas about marriage on totally different things. This gets us nowhere.

fair enough.

i base my marriage on two people who love each other enough to say, "we're going to do this, together" and then finding out for themselves how they can best function as a unit that provides both members with love, support, and solidarity.

i also think my view on marriage is affected by being gay -- gay relationships, especially long term gay male relationships, tend to be models of equality, respect, space, and solidarity. i do think this is something that straight people can learn from gay people. due to commonalities of gender, there seems to be a greater level of trust in most of the gay relationships i've seen.

and i know Joyfulgirl would agree, and she probably knows more long term gay male couples than i do.

i still can't believe you think a married man looking at a playboy suggests that he doesn't love his wife.

i find that shocking, and really rather patronizing.

 

[Irvine511]

It doesn't matter how many times anyone said anything, Irvine511. What matters is that she made a judgment call against people who believe the way I do and yet at the same time, whined about me making a judgment call about married men looking at naked women other than their wives. It's absolutely outrageous.

the comparisons you're making aren't applicable.

but this is Martha's job, not mine.

 

[80sU2isBest]

fair enough.

i base my marriage on two people who love each other enough to say, "we're going to do this, together" and then finding out for themselves how they can best function as a unit that provides both members with love, support, and solidarity.

i also think my view on marriage is affected by being gay -- gay relationships, especially long term gay male relationships, tend to be models of equality, respect, space, and solidarity. i do think this is something that straight people can learn from gay people. due to commonalities of gender, there seems to be a greater level of trust in most of the gay relationships i've seen.

and i know Joyfulgirl would agree, and she probably knows more long term gay male couples than i do.

i still can't believe you think a married man looking at a playboy suggests that he doesn't love his wife.

i find that shocking, and really rather patronizing.

I don't think patronising is the word you're looking for. Patronising means to treat someone with condescension. Nothing I've said has done that.

About love - as you know, love is more than merely saying "I love you" and "I want to be with you". When you love someone, you treat that person with respect, and you place that person's feelings and needs above your own. What is respectful and loving about looking at another woman naked?

As you know, my views on all of this are centered in my Christian faith. Christ said that if a man looks at a woman with lust, he has committed adultery in his heart. That is one reason that I believe porn is wrong, especially in a marriage.

 

[80sU2isBest]

the comparisons you're making aren't applicable.

but this is Martha's job, not mine.

They're very applicable, Irvine. She made a judgment call against people who think porn shouldn't be in a marriage, after complaining about me for making a jufdgment call about married men who look at porn. Just because you don't see the hypocrisy doesn't mean it's not there.

 

[joyfulgirl]

i also think my view on marriage is affected by being gay -- gay relationships, especially long term gay male relationships, tend to be models of equality, respect, space, and solidarity. i do think this is something that straight people can learn from gay people. due to commonalities of gender, there seems to be a greater level of trust in most of the gay relationships i've seen.

and i know Joyfulgirl would agree, and she probably knows more long term gay male couples than i do.

I do absolutely agree and have said so many times.

 

[Moonlit_Angel]

What!? Divorce imposes a great burden on society. We just don't want to do anything about it.

Divorce is a burden to the family and the family alone. My life is not affected if Mr. and Mrs. Smith in Iowa decide to end their marriage. That is something that that particular family has to deal with.

Also, okay, so even if your children thing holds some water, again I will ask the question about the couples who DON'T have children. Why would you still feel it necessary to control what they do in the privacy of their bedroom?

Originally posted by nbcrusader
Just like guns are neutral as based on your methodology of recognizing harm.

Yeah...I already said that the gun can't do anything just sitting there by itself. I've already said that I'm not a fan of guns, personally, but if someone is responsible with one and therefore wishes to own one, that is entirely their choice.

Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
But I am still of the opinion that porn is unhealthy, especially in a marriage

Yes. You think it's unhealthy. But others don't, as has been shown throughout this thread. Therefore, if you don't want porn in your life, fine, that's your choice, you certainly don't have to. But if other couples do, that's their choice.

Also, once again, porn can only be unhealthy if someone makes it so.

Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
and that if someone truly loves and respects his wife, he will have no desire to look at other women naked.

And as I already said a ways back in this thread, porn is not there for the sole purpose of looking at another human being naked. Married couples can use it to get ideas to improve their sex life. People can see it as an art form.

Seriously, so once I get married, does this mean that I should cease having any fantasies about male celebrities I find attractive? I mean, I'm married now, so I shouldn't be having fantasies about anyone other than my husband, right?

Angela

 

[nbcrusader]

Divorce is a burden to the family and the family alone. My life is not affected if Mr. and Mrs. Smith in Iowa decide to end their marriage. That is something that that particular family has to deal with.

Sounds like an optimistic view of divorce. The pain and damage, however, are not limited to the family's home.