The Great Porn Debate - The Coomites vs Anti-Faparians

[Carcinogenesis]

The thing about porn regulation is that it's just not feasible without completely banning it outright. The UK tried to age-gate internet porn but with all things British, the whole plan fell apart before it could even be implemented. Even if there is a complete ban, people desperate enough will try to subvert it. An underground porn market will form and all the ethical concerns related to the porn industry will intensify.

 

[Queen Elizabeth II]

What really gets me about the whole thing is this idea that there's anything new going on here. That porn being readily available even, unfortunately, to kids is a product of modern technology or that our culture is particularly sex obsessed or that porn has become more hardcore and extreme than it was in the past.

While I mostly agree, there is a core difference on accessibility.

Two hundred years ago; while these things were available they were not as readily accessible to children. A child could not just stroll into a bookshop and ask for 2girls1cup. Now every other 14 year old has seen it or modern equivalents thereof. Porn consumption is now also socially acceptable, a legalized drug if you will with not dissimilar side effects.

There was also historically the social discouragement. You do still have your choirs of professionally offended religious and feminists, but they're far from as influential as the old school Episcopalian churches. Porn is accepted now as a social norm. While not necessarily unhealthy, the current proliferation of it is far beyond anything we've ever had before.

I'm not saying banning porn is the right answer, but the current situation could do with improvement. An underground market could form, but perhaps throwing a level of shade and disgust to it might do something for discouraging it. I'm thinking of the Netherlands here when with legalization cannabis use increased.

 

[Slappy McGherkin]

Fun fact: The first recorded instance of tentacle porn was 1814.

And I'm old enough to remember that!

Not really, but I grew up in the age where one of our buddies would snag his dad's Playboy magazine and bring it to the tree fort in the woods. We'd marvel at the naked female body -- boobies! There's such an onslaught of porn available today it's ridiculous. While I don't think it should be illegal, I do think it should be more controlled in some fashion. It really can warp people and delivers a totally unrealistic expectation of what a committed, loving, sexual relationship actually is.

 

[Freya]

It's sexual abuse to allow a child to watch pornography. Actually illegal. Yet porn companies make it easy for 11 year olds with phones to come across it without even meaning to. Why on earth is widespread child abuse legal? This is obvious.

You wouldn't even need to ban it entirely, just force them to go back to adult stores. That way they couldn't screech about free speech.

You can't go onto a site about tobacco or alcohol without a prompt asking you to enter you age. Yet there is no such thing on porn sites.

FOR FUCKS SAKE

 

[byuu]

It's sexual abuse to allow a child to watch pornography. Actually illegal. Yet porn companies make it easy for 11 year olds with phones to come across it without even meaning to. Why on earth is widespread child abuse legal? This is obvious.

Just don't give an 11 year old a smartphone.

 

[Freya]

Just don't give an 11 year old a smartphone.

The problem is that most parents are too retarded and inept to follow that advice. Imagine if I put up giant murals of interracial gangbangs on my property and then just told parents to cover their kids eyes as they drove by.

The implication here(don't buy your kids a phone, don't let them eat McDonald's every day) is that children born to shitty parents are totally fucked. Which in turn creates a vicious cycle where the kids go on to become shitty parents themselves and create offspring that are even more fucked.

Personal freedom means jack-shit in a population where most people are fat tards addicted to pornography and high fructose corn syrup. Such a population is not capable of sustaining a functioning society, at least not one you'd want to live in.

 

[ProgKing of the North]

The problem is that most parents are too exceptional and inept to follow that advice. Imagine if I put up giant murals of interracial gangbangs on my property and then just told parents to cover their kids eyes as they drove by.

The implication here(don't buy your kids a phone, don't let them eat McDonald's every day) is that children born to shitty parents are totally fucked. Which in turn creates a vicious cycle where the kids go on to become shitty parents themselves and create offspring that are even more fucked.

Personal freedom means jack-shit in a population where most people are fat tards addicted to pornography and high fructose corn syrup. Such a population is not capable of sustaining a functioning society, at least not one you'd want to live in.

So by that logic McDonald’s should be shut down because some people are shitty parents.

And no, I shouldn’t be able to have a mural of an interracial (don’t see why that makes it better or worse but ok) gangbang on my front lawn, but if I wanna paint one in my living room it’s not my fault if some little shit looks through my window

 

[Freya]

So by that logic McDonald’s should be shut down because some people are shitty parents.

We've always had junk food, not comparable to digital pornography. But I do think we should tax it heavily and start to stigmatize people eating it like we do with smokers now.

And no, I shouldn’t be able to have a mural of an interracial (don’t see why that makes it better or worse but ok) gangbang on my front lawn, but if I wanna paint one in my living room it’s not my fault if some little shit looks through my window

The situation with porn today is more comparable to the mural, as porn is aggressively displayed and pushed wherever possible. It's not a private thing.

 

[{o}P II]

i don't get the thing about porn being addictive

like how many times can you jack it a day

 

[Spooky Bones]

Pornographic materials can be considered forms of free expression and speech

The hell it can. Free speech provisions are fundamentally about politics. Obscenity was never meant to be protected much less material that degrades, exploits, and harms those used to produce it.

 

[Where Do You Find Them?]

A child could not just stroll into a bookshop and ask for 2girls1cup.

They could. They could walk into a bookshop and buy what we would consider to be child porn. Social attitudes towards children were very different back then, there wasn't the same idea that they needed to be protected from adult topics. Laws restricting children's access wouldn't come along until a lot later, though that's partially because they tried to just ban porn outright at first. Didn't work at all.

I grew up in the age where one of our buddies would snag his dad's Playboy magazine and bring it to the tree fort in the woods

Oh yeah, it's way more available to kids than at any point in the past 100 years or so, just not in the past 1000 or so.

A lot of the problem with discussions of availability is that everything is more available these days. Porn is more available but then so is literature or scientific knowledge. If you instead look at how much effort is spent to keep these things away from kids, we're at a high point in history.

I tried to be pretty neutral and just talk facts about the history of it so far. My actual opinion is that more should be done, specifically on the subject of children's access. It's not the end of the world and it's certainly not anything new that's going to destroy society but our morals have moved on and improved from the past. Kids get this period of protected innocence and are allowed to leave it at their own pace. The only problem is what should be done about it. If a teenager goes and searches up some filthy shit I couldn't care. They went and searched for it and they're at the age where they're meant to be exploring stuff. It's the kid who accidentally stumbles across it that I'd worry about.

Also the "Oh god won't somebody think of the children. Ban it all" argument is as retarded here as it is when people apply it to guns or anything else. Children need to be supervised, protected and kept away from unsuitable things. The world doesn't need to be wrapped in bubblewrap so they can go anywhere and do anything.

I also think the free speech arguments are somewhat retarded. It's not that they're wrong exactly it's just totally orthogonal to the reasons that free speech is so important.

So yeah, more to demarcate porn and make it easier for parents to prevent their children's access would be nice if technically. Banning it is going to end about as well as it has for every society that's ever tried to ban it.

 

[ProgKing of the North]

The hell it can. Free speech provisions are fundamentally about politics. Obscenity was never meant to be protected much less material that degrades, exploits, and harms those used to produce it.

Not all porn degrades, exploits, or harms those who participate. Sure, plenty does, but there’s plenty that’s just amateurs filming stuff for fun; and plenty more that don’t consider being paid to fuck on camera any more degrading than any other type of wageslaving, and who are you to tell them they’re wrong?

Besides that, do you really want the government deciding what’s okay for you to see? Give them the power to start regulating this shit, you think they’ll stop at hardcore porn?

 

[HeyYou]

So by that logic McDonald’s should be shut down because some people are shitty parents.

And no, I shouldn’t be able to have a mural of an interracial (don’t see why that makes it better or worse but ok) gangbang on my front lawn, but if I wanna paint one in my living room it’s not my fault if some little shit looks through my window

Well, you just perfectly described the arguments and complexity surrounding obscenity laws, which have been around since the early 1800s. At what point is this material displayed on a front lawn instead of inside a house?

 

[ProgKing of the North]

Well, you just perfectly described the arguments and complexity surrounding obscenity laws, which have been around since the early 1800s. At what point is this material displayed on a front lawn instead of inside a house?

Where it can be clearly seen from a public street/sidewalk imo

 

[Billy "the Bot" Bobson]

The discussion surrounding pornography is inextricably linked to how we understand the internet: is it a public space or is it a private space? I am far, far from the most knowledgable person regarding computers and networks, but it seems to me that if you can enter in a url and easily access most of a websites content then it is not a private space but a public space.

An alternative that doesn't seem to be mentioned that often; add a new extension to the url. rather than it being, say "https://www.example.com" it would be "https://www.example.priv.com" or "https://www.example.pub.com" with .priv standing for "private" and requiring a key of some sort to access and .pub standing for "public" and requiring no key to access. I think this makes it more clear when determining entry, much like when you're carded for drinks or cigarettes.

 

[HeyYou]

Where it can be clearly seen from a public street/sidewalk imo

Yeah, that's where the internet complicates things. Since the internet is public, is displaying pornography so openly obscene, or is it no different from a sex shop on a public street? I'm of course going to err on the side of the second argument, but I have seen smarter people than me argue the first.

 

[A Logging Company]

We've always had junk food, not comparable to digital pornography.

You wouldn't download a cheeseburger.

 

[Lemmingwise]

thank you for reminding me about Avenue Q

This is the most jewish things I saw today.

What really gets me about the whole thing is this idea that there's anything new going on here. That porn being readily available even, unfortunately, to kids is a product of modern technology or that our culture is particularly sex obsessed or that porn has become more hardcore and extreme than it was in the past.

All of these things are bunk. I think this mostly comes from the fact that porn has never been publicly socially acceptable, so historical accounts tend not to mention it, but it was there. We've found tons of it. People imagine the Victorians were particularly uptight but they wrote shitloads of erotica covering all sorts of subjects: incest, bdsm, pissing and shitting, homosexuality, feminization of men. Everything you can find in modern porn we have Victorian examples of and as you go further back in history surviving examples of this stuff get more scarce but no less lurid.

Every society in the history of humanity has been at least a little sex obsessed. It's just part of being human. There's a reason the worlds oldest profession is prostitution. Our society is pretty open about sex but not unusually so. In some ways we're less open than we used to be. Pre-reformation people would just have sex in public. They'd have sex in the same bed their kids were sleeping in (usually only one bed in a house). Our expectations of privacy around sex are actually pretty uptight compared to our ancestors.

Then there's the "loads of studies say it's bad for you" science. It's nowhere near as simple as that. Lots of studies show the opposite. People who do meta-studies often come to the conclusion that it's a total cluster fuck with the porn lobby on one side and the puritanical christians/radfems/whoever else has decided that sex is bad this week on the other obscuring any actual scientific inquiry. The only real answer is we don't know.

Fun fact: The first recorded instance of tentacle porn was 1814.

Yes, 8 year olds were watching furry porn and elsa/spiderman abortions for the entire of human history. Get over it bigots.

To put it slightly less sarcastic, I'm agree that it's a very politicized topic from each side. But a couple of things that are new is the breadth of access offered; the early age at which is offered and also how few restraints there are on it. I don't even mean censorship or things like that, I mean how rare messages are that porn is harmful.

Perhaps it's a little different in the United States, compared to the Coomerlands I'm in that has government funded tv programs that encourages teenagers to explore sex and drugs,

And I do think porn is harmful, about on a similar level as alcohol and soft-drugs. As in: with moderation the harm can be managed, but they're not really appropriate for kids and they have a tendency to grow beyond moderation.

It reminds me of opium and china; there were legal constraints on opium trade in Britain. Meanwhile, they enforced the legality of opium in China. They even militarily supported the chinese side against the side that wanted restraints against opium legal use. I can just imagine how angry Chinese officials must have been when they realised that the opium trade wasn't as legal in Britain itself. It puts somewhat into perspective modern chinese manufacturers that use toxic elements in children's toys.

It also reminds me of the current situation where by far the largest market share of porn producting is in jewish hands, while in Israel there are internet constraints/protections on viewing porn.

 

[ProgKing of the North]

^That’s hardly unique to Jews, look up Mormon investment in Las Vegas casinos

 

[break these cuffs]

... horseshoe theory proven right yet again.

>i only hold the most milquetoast and inoffensive views because it gives me a smug sense of superiority to point out how everyone is wrong
Spoken like a true Sargonian.



Slate only. No clayfags allowed. Rope tossers get the rope. Horseshoe niggers are first against the wall.