Pornography, should it be banned?

[ElPatron]

I beg to differ! While porn is all well and good there is stuff out there that breaks so many laws that its not even funny and it should be brought down and the people evolved with the creation of such things should be publicly humiliated (I'm aware how that sounds)

The fact that there are videos of people being killed on the internet should be proof enough the internet needs to be better regulated in general...

First, there is NO need to waste even more money in creating agencies to regulate pornographic content.

Second, if that thing you watched was so illegal, then the existence of agencies would lead to your arrest because you watched them accidentally. That's how the world works, GET USED TO IT.

Third, child pornography is distributed trough "innocent" computers. Agencies tracking pornography would lead to the arrest of thousands of innocent people who will live the rest of their lives as a felon. Maybe even you have traces of it that you can't access or even read. But it's all that it takes to throw you in jail.

Fourth, privacy. We are all innocent until proven guilty.

Fifth, the government shouldn't regulate the internet - say goodbye to Wikileaks or white-hat hackers.

Sixth, the media shown the images of Saddam being hanged while I was eating my goddamned dinner. If anyone needs regulation is the media because they hardly have freedom of speech anymore with all the political agendas being pushed by the top dogs in the media.

I have no problem if you wish for a Orwellian government but that's not how I roll.

 

[ShadowStar42]

- Pornography completely objectifies women

This is actually still a matter of debate, similar to the sex industry. From one perspective pornography objectifies women, from the other it empowers women to take control of their own sexuality. While certainly pornography effects the way see women is it really the place of society to tell women that if they want to have sex they have to keep it hidden.

- It sets unrealistic standards for real sex

While this is true, I don't see that it is an actionable problem. Action movies set unrealistic standards for fighting and The Dead Poets Society sets an unreasonable standard for college, we as a society trust our citizens to tell the difference between reality and fantasy.

- Many sex slaves in the world are linked to pornography

Which is a great reason to keep a close eye on the porn industry and to crack down on slavery but ending porn isn't a solution to the problem. An example would be like saying that underage people generally buy drinks at gas stations therefor all gas stations should be closed.

- 98% of female performers in pornography are unhappy (Apparently from a real study according to him)

1) That sounds like a fake number.
2) I'm pretty sure that a high percentage of sanitation workers are unhappy with their jobs.
3) Would women who are in porn be more happy if they did not have the money porn brings into their lives.

- Lack of pornography would mean a drop in sexual crimes (I think completely the opposite)

I can't say that your friend is wrong in this, but neither can he say that he's right. There's really just no studies showing a definitive correlation or lack thereof. That being said a similar argument (with similar facts backing it) could be made about video games and violence.

- Stops children getting their hands on porno by accident

True, but chopping kids hands off would have the same effect. Or to make a more reasonable argument, his argument leads to us banning everything that a child might get a hold of that we don't want them to. Guns, prescription drugs, alcohol, tobacco, sharp things etc. etc. ...

- If pornography was banned, it would mean a drop in human trafficking (again, an opinion I think completely the opposite to)

Here your friend is probably right, I understand what your argument probably is (well if no one can get porn then more people will hire sex slaves), but there is a VERY large population who consumes porn and a very small population that would even consider purchasing a slave or knowingly associate with someone who did. Presumably sex trafficking would reduce somewhat due to the fact that the pornographers, no longer having as reliable financial incentive, would stop importing them. That being said there are easier and more reliable ways to reduce sex trafficking than by gutting an entire industry.

Anyway, these are the arguments that I would use with your friend.

 

[Frozen Donkey Wheel2]

I know you said you disagree with these arguments, so this isn't directed at you per se, this is just a convenient way of summing up my opinion.

- Pornography completely objectifies women

This is obviously not inherently true. For one thing, it's possible to make a porno that DOESN'T objectify women, and for another thing, it's possible to make NON-pornographic content that DOES objectify women. This argument is utter nonsense.

- It sets unrealistic standards for real sex

So what? Batman movies set unrealistic standards for vigilante justice. Doesn't mean we should ban those too.

- Many sex slaves in the world are linked to pornography

That doesn't mean that banning porn would stop sex trafficking.

- 98% of female performers in pornography are unhappy (Apparently from a real study according to him)

Well, YEAH. Did it really take a study to figure that out? But that's irrelevant for two reasons: (1) It's still totally voluntary, no one can be legally forced to be in porn, and (2) If someone is in a situation where the only way to make money is to be a porno, then the problem that needs to be solved isn't porn, it's the poverty that got them there in the first place. Get rid of porn, and all you're doing is depriving this hypothetical person of a legal way to make money. The obvious problem with this is that once you've banned porn, THEY STILL NEED THAT MONEY.

- Lack of pornography would mean a drop in sexual crimes (I think completely the opposite)

Totally impossible to prove, and as you said, the opposite theory is just as valid.

- Stops children getting their hands on porno by accident

(A) No it doesn't, it only makes it less likely (B)If a kid gets his hands on something that he's too young to see, it's the fault of the parents, not the product, and (C) Kids have been sneaking peeks at Playboys for decades. We have n't declined into Armageddon yet.

- If pornography was banned, it would mean a drop in human trafficking (again, an opinion I think completely the opposite to)

Kind of redundant, as this was already stated in two previous points. I have already torn them apart, so I guess I'm done here.

Your friend is an idiot. If you haven't already told him yourself, you should read what people are saying here and tell him. Or just show him this topic. He sounds incredibly ignorant, especially for the "Kids might look at this stuff that's meant for adults, so we should just BAN it to solve the problem" mentality.

Modern courtship is basically legalized prostitution, if you think about it. One way or another, we're paying for it.

I think a better statement might be that prostitution is just a very simplified version of modern courtship, not the other way around. Obviously there's a give-and-take in any kind of relationship.

 

[Lt._nefarious]

I beg to differ! While porn is all well and good there is stuff out there that breaks so many laws that its not even funny and it should be brought down and the people evolved with the creation of such things should be publicly humiliated (I'm aware how that sounds)

The fact that there are videos of people being killed on the internet should be proof enough the internet needs to be better regulated in general...

First, there is NO need to waste even more money in creating agencies to regulate pornographic content.

Second, if that thing you watched was so illegal, then the existence of agencies would lead to your arrest because you watched them accidentally. That's how the world works, GET USED TO IT.

Third, child pornography is distributed trough "innocent" computers. Agencies tracking pornography would lead to the arrest of thousands of innocent people who will live the rest of their lives as a felon. Maybe even you have traces of it that you can't access or even read. But it's all that it takes to throw you in jail.

Fourth, privacy. We are all innocent until proven guilty.

Fifth, the government shouldn't regulate the internet - say goodbye to Wikileaks or white-hat hackers.

Sixth, the media shown the images of Saddam being hanged while I was eating my goddamned dinner. If anyone needs regulation is the media because they hardly have freedom of speech anymore with all the political agendas being pushed by the top dogs in the media.

I have no problem if you wish for a Orwellian government but that's not how I roll.

You misunderstand, my man, I don't mind porn (not a huge fan) but I think regulation wouldn't go amiss. I get where you are coming from with most your points but I think you can agree that something should be done about the VERY illegal content (which for the record I don't view).

I get privacy and I totally agree with you there and what I want is something very hard to achieve, I know)

Thirdly I only mean s**t that is already illegal should be tracked and stopped.

Y'dig?

 

[ElPatron]

Thirdly I only mean s**t that is already illegal should be tracked and stopped.

Y'dig?

But that is already being done. Most websites don't want illegal stuff hosted or they get in trouble. So most of what you see is perfectly legal.

Creating agencies/changing existing agencies to hunt down porn would not be productive (yeah, paying people to watch porn - yeah right, my taxes at work) and would only give the governments a reason to restrict the internet.

Also, I don't think that images of people dying are illegal. I don't care, I know that there is a high chance that my hard drive has illegal content and I am almost sure that at least half of the people reading this thread have enough evidence on their PC to be arrested.

 

[JoesshittyOs]

- Pornography completely objectifies women

Who choose to put themselves in that situation of their own free will

- It sets unrealistic standards for real sex

Why would you ban something because of that?

- Many sex slaves in the world are linked to pornography

Should have asked for his source. Not to mention that banning it would require a world wide ban in order to effect alleged illegal sex slave rings, which would just mean they'd fine different ways of exploiting the women.

- 98% of female performers in pornography are unhappy (Apparently from a real study according to him)

Your friend is full of shit. It's safe to assume that over half of the porn out on the internet is from amateur couples doing it because they get off on filming it.

And professional porn stars? I'd say a good 1/3 of them have a twitter account, and looking through some of their tweets lets you know they very much love their job. Are some women forced into it through a lack of any other means of making money? I'm sure there is, but what your friend says is completely untrue.

- Lack of pornography would mean a drop in sexual crimes (I think completely the opposite)

There's no way to possibly tell. I'd assume it would just make some people more sexually frustrated, but that's my unbacked opinion.

- Stops children getting their hands on porno by accident

Should we ban alcohol and tobacco for the sake of the children? It's the world we live in today. In most countries that aren't the US or UK, nudity is allowed into everyday TV, and kids become accustomed to it much quicker, and learn that it's not that big of a deal. the way we try to force kids nowadays to pretend to have never seen a boob till they're 18 is a little ridiculous.

- If pornography was banned, it would mean a drop in human trafficking (again, an opinion I think completely the opposite to)

And once again, you're probably right on that one. Just no. It just means that they wouldn't be filming it.

 

[burningdragoon]

Each of those points are either wrong (or at least needs a citation) or not even close to a good reason for banning something... or both. Plenty of list-based break downs already, so I'll just skip to the silliest.

It sets unrealistic standards for real sex
He's right. And Romantic Comedies set unrealistic standards for relationships. Action movies set unrealistic standards for how many bullets a person can take to the face. Comedies set unrealistic standards for how funny people should be. Anime sets unrealistic standards for how giant fucking robotsthat's robots that are fucking giant, not giant robots built for fucking should work. etc, etc.

- It sets unrealistic standards for real sex

So what? Batman movies set unrealistic standards for vigilante justice. Doesn't mean we should ban those too.

bahaha, this is probably my favorite response here.

 

[Powereaver]

nah it shouldnt be banned, id say even without pornography something else will pop up without it and tbh the 98% of women in the industry might be unhappy but a lot of the time in that case they sign themselves up to it due to desperation for money or funds.. i was suprised to hear it was a lot of uni students and such getting into the sex industry out of desperation for money. so yea i dont think it should be banned

 

[Sean Hollyman]

Hell no, I mean where could I watch it then?

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Should pornography be completely banned? a discussion i got into with a friend of mine earlier today.
He is of the opinion that all pornography of any shape or form (including naked sex scenes in movies and scenes depicting sex in movies) should be banned for these reasons:

- Pornography completely objectifies women
- It sets unrealistic standards for real sex
- Many sex slaves in the world are linked to pornography
- 98% of female performers in pornography are unhappy (Apparently from a real study according to him)
- Lack of pornography would mean a drop in sexual crimes (I think completely the opposite)
- Stops children getting their hands on porno by accident
- If pornography was banned, it would mean a drop in human trafficking (again, an opinion I think completely the opposite to)

I highly disagree that pornography should be banned. I thought it would be more of a motivation for people to pursue prostitutes and underground, seedier pornography if it were completely prohibited. It isn't a perfect industry, but at least it is with some semblance of legality. At least it isn't in the same state as the illegal drug trade, an example of prohibition gone horribly, horribly wrong.

I was honestly quite fascinated by his point of view, and was wondering what the lovely people of the escapist thought on the subject.

Your friend is spouting talking points from a certain subset of feminists who are anti-porn; it's the same subset which, on its extreme end, sees all heterosexual sex as being inherently rape.

Porn certainly does objectify women, but it objectifies men in equal proportion; everyone involved is a sex object, it's kind of the point.

It may set unrealistic standards for sex, but that's hardly a reason to ban it.

Sex slaves may make a portion of the porn in the world, but not the majority of the stuff that we're watching in the west -- and what's more, the stuff that is made with sex slaves is exactly the stuff that would wind up on the black market if such a ban were created. In fact, a ban on porn would if anything encourage black market slave-made porn, not discourage it.

I'd like to see a source for the 98% of female performers being unhappy quote; no source, no credibility on a statistic like that I'm afraid.

If lack of porn meant lack of sex crime, presence of violent videogames would mean rise in violent crime; the violent crime rate has been dropping consistently for about 20 years now. I'd imagine that includes rape, for that matter.

I seriously doubt a drop in porn would mean a drop in human trafficking; (forced)prostitution and porn service two different markets.

Moral of the story: your friend is an idealistic prude with a very warped view of pornography.

 

[ph0b0s123]

- Lack of pornography would mean a drop in sexual crimes (I think completely the opposite)

This idea has been debunked so many times. The best debunking I saw recently was a 'freakonomics' style look at how the rate of take up of access to the internet (and presumably porn) in US different states tallied with the rate of decrease in rape. It works out as the faster the internet take up the quicker the decrease in rape.....

You can read it about it here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/30/smut_freakonomics/

Now of cause correlation is not causation, but the logic looks pretty good. Unless there is another mechanism that makes a state want more internet and to rape less. Maybe it's is all those cat videos on youtube that take away those rapey urges.....

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

- Lack of pornography would mean a drop in sexual crimes (I think completely the opposite)

This idea has been debunked so many times. The best debunking I saw recently was a 'freakonomics' style look at how the rate of take up of access to the internet (and presumably porn) in US different states tallied with the rate of decrease in rape. It works out as the faster the internet take up the quicker the decrease in rape.....

You can read it about it here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/30/smut_freakonomics/

Now of cause correlation is not causation, but the logic looks pretty good. Unless there is another mechanism that makes a state want more internet and to rape less. Maybe it's is all those cat videos on youtube that take away those rapey urges.....

People are going to shoot this down by claiming rape is entirely about control, and has absolutely nothing at all to do with sex in any case ever. Fair warning.

Captcha: barking mad

seems appropriate.

 

[Lucas Auraelius]

I love that first point, that porn (in general, apparently) objectifies women. Pretty sure all my gay porn is exempt from all that.

 

[weker]

We kind of need pornography for you know... happy happy ALONE -_- time, most people tend to find it excessively difficult without porn to watch. This special is incredibly beneficial for people by lowering stress, slight exercise, not to mention personal enjoyment, through it's gigantic rush chemicals through the body. If I recall correctly it can extend your life by 5 years if done frequently.
I think the problem lies totally with the way it's handled, it's a case where so much porn is next to prostitution, where all it takes is a camera and some license I think to make it legal.

 

[ph0b0s123]

- Lack of pornography would mean a drop in sexual crimes (I think completely the opposite)

This idea has been debunked so many times. The best debunking I saw recently was a 'freakonomics' style look at how the rate of take up of access to the internet (and presumably porn) in US different states tallied with the rate of decrease in rape. It works out as the faster the internet take up the quicker the decrease in rape.....

You can read it about it here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/30/smut_freakonomics/

Now of cause correlation is not causation, but the logic looks pretty good. Unless there is another mechanism that makes a state want more internet and to rape less. Maybe it's is all those cat videos on youtube that take away those rapey urges.....

People are going to shoot this down by claiming rape is entirely about control, and has absolutely nothing at all to do with sex in any case ever. Fair warning.

Captcha: barking mad

seems appropriate.

Now I'm confused. Porn is bad because it shows sex which encourages people to rape. But then Rape is not about sex but control, so why then is porn bad again if sex has nothing do with it?

That's a rather schizophrenic argument. Or was I expecting too much with looking for logic.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

- Lack of pornography would mean a drop in sexual crimes (I think completely the opposite)

This idea has been debunked so many times. The best debunking I saw recently was a 'freakonomics' style look at how the rate of take up of access to the internet (and presumably porn) in US different states tallied with the rate of decrease in rape. It works out as the faster the internet take up the quicker the decrease in rape.....

You can read it about it here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/30/smut_freakonomics/

Now of cause correlation is not causation, but the logic looks pretty good. Unless there is another mechanism that makes a state want more internet and to rape less. Maybe it's is all those cat videos on youtube that take away those rapey urges.....

People are going to shoot this down by claiming rape is entirely about control, and has absolutely nothing at all to do with sex in any case ever. Fair warning.

Captcha: barking mad

seems appropriate.

Now I'm confused. Porn is bad because it shows sex which encourages people to rape. But then Rape is not about sex but control, so why then is porn bad again if sex has nothing do with it?

That's a rather schizophrenic argument. Or was I expecting too much with looking for logic.

The two ideas are from two different waves of feminism. The anti-porn one was a fringe element from a now old-school and relatively uncommon branch of feminism. The porn is not about sex thing is a part of the modern wave of feminism that brought you the slut walk. As far as I know, it's long been believed that rape was mostly about power, but it's really only in recent years that it's become a mainstream belief that it is exclusively about power, and sex is nothing but a means of achieving it.

 

[Lord Beautiful]

Ha-

Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha.

Haha...

Wait, that's a joke, right?

 

[Altorin]

Should pornography be completely banned? a discussion i got into with a friend of mine earlier today.
He is of the opinion that all pornography of any shape or form (including naked sex scenes in movies and scenes depicting sex in movies) should be banned for these reasons:

- Pornography completely objectifies women
- It sets unrealistic standards for real sex
- Many sex slaves in the world are linked to pornography
- 98% of female performers in pornography are unhappy (Apparently from a real study according to him)
- Lack of pornography would mean a drop in sexual crimes (I think completely the opposite)
- Stops children getting their hands on porno by accident
- If pornography was banned, it would mean a drop in human trafficking (again, an opinion I think completely the opposite to)

I highly disagree that pornography should be banned. I thought it would be more of a motivation for people to pursue prostitutes and underground, seedier pornography if it were completely prohibited. It isn't a perfect industry, but at least it is with some semblance of legality. At least it isn't in the same state as the illegal drug trade, an example of prohibition gone horribly, horribly wrong.

I was honestly quite fascinated by his point of view, and was wondering what the lovely people of the escapist thought on the subject.

your friend is wrong. I was going to say something meaner, but I don't know him. I just know that (at least in my opinion) he's completely wrong about Porn. He sounds like one of those abstinence only advocates which is a whole other kettle of fish that I believe is actually pretty horrible.

- Pornography objectifies both men and women. I'd go so far as to say Porn itself probably tends to objectify men more then women - in Porn, men are nothing but objects, usually penises, mostly off screen. Sure, people use Porn (read: almost fucking everyone) will objectify women to help themselves... enjoy.. the show, but that's just how dirty thoughts work.

- Sets Unrealistic Expectations? So? Porn probably won't make you a great lover, but then, lots of women like porn, and like to be treated just the way the girls in porn do. So maybe your friend just needs to find more interesting women? They're out there. The only real unrealistic expectations I find with porn is based on the fact that porn is meant to be watched. Everything is open, and that's just not how sex works most of the time. Things that are awesome become uncomfortable when you're also having sex with a camera.

- Human Trafficking.. We have laws for that, and I for one don't tend to watch "human trafficking porn". At least I don't think I do. I'd say "Human Trafficking Porn" should be illegal in the same vein that Beastiality and Kiddie Porn are illegal (at least Making it. It would suck to go to jail because you like asian women and that thai girl was actually trafficked to malaysia to make a video) - crimes are involved, so make it illegal. You don't need to destroy the industry to fight what I'm sure is actually a fairly small segment of pornography - most pornography is done by Porn Stars. They're not trafficked anywhere but the Dunkin Donuts.

- bullshit statistic is bullshit. Either the number was completely pulled out of his ass (as 72.56% of numbers are), or the study was biased and not scientifically valid. Perhaps they asked leading questions and came to erroneous results. I imagine if Porn Actors were unhappy with their job, they'd stop. Noones holding a gun to their head, unless of course, they're being trafficked.

- Drop in Crime Rate... Crime isn't something that's easy to quantify. There are tons of factors that go into just figuring it out. It's foolish to just say something like "doing this will cause this to happen to the crime rate" It's usually the things you don't notice that have interesting effects on crime. I think I agree with you - people who have sexual urges that might lead to a crime can let off steam using porn, and probably LESS rapes take place because of porn. The people who rape AND watch porn, would probably rape more readily without porn.

- Kids finding Porn. Literally throwing the baby out with the bathwater, lol. Kids aren't destroyed by porn. It's the parents job to help guide their children into adulthood, and it's the child's job to try and undermine that at every possibilty - it's the ultimate test of parenthood, dealing with your kids. But even if Porn is harmful to kids (and I don't really think it is), is it so harmful that we need to throw it away entirely? that just seems silly. I think we ALL have the story about how porn influenced our childhoods. I certainly have porn stories from when I was a kid, but that's just part of being a kid. It's important that it's there for them to find. Like... it's important. Kids need porn as much as anyone else, and I can't believe I just said that. I'm not saying we should sell porn to kids. I'm not saying kids SHOULD be watching porn. All I'm saying is, it's part of growing up, learning about the opposite sex (or your own sex) in a safe environment is important.

- Again with the human trafficking. I don't understand this. I guess it's the same argument with prostitutes. There's no possible way ANYONE could enjoy having sex, so they have to bring in slaves. Give me a break. I'm not denying it's out there, but it's not SO rampant that an industry that has shaped technology and media in general in the way that porn has (VHS and Blu Ray were both chosen by pornographers, and they both beat their competition)

 

[DarkRyter]

Should pornography be completely banned? a discussion i got into with a friend of mine earlier today.
He is of the opinion that all pornography of any shape or form (including naked sex scenes in movies and scenes depicting sex in movies) should be banned for these reasons:

- Pornography completely objectifies women
- It sets unrealistic standards for real sex
- Many sex slaves in the world are linked to pornography
- 98% of female performers in pornography are unhappy (Apparently from a real study according to him)
- Lack of pornography would mean a drop in sexual crimes (I think completely the opposite)
- Stops children getting their hands on porno by accident
- If pornography was banned, it would mean a drop in human trafficking (again, an opinion I think completely the opposite to)

I highly disagree that pornography should be banned. I thought it would be more of a motivation for people to pursue prostitutes and underground, seedier pornography if it were completely prohibited. It isn't a perfect industry, but at least it is with some semblance of legality. At least it isn't in the same state as the illegal drug trade, an example of prohibition gone horribly, horribly wrong.

I was honestly quite fascinated by his point of view, and was wondering what the lovely people of the escapist thought on the subject.

Tell your friend on a completely objective level nothing should be banned and that any reason he has for banning them is ultimately tied to social mores (hurting people is "bad", not hurting people is "good") rather than real logic.