[QUOTE=Billiam;27720436]I provided a clear, possible situation in which pornography can harm a child.
You can't just say "No it isn't."[/QUOTE]
You provided what you [i]thought[/i] was a clear, possible situation in which pornography damages a child's perception of sex, and I explained that thoughts aren't permanent and what a child thinks one day isn't representative of what they will always believe. People learn.
[QUOTE=Xolo;27720466]You provided what you [I]thought[/I] was a clear, possible situation in which pornography damages a child's perception of sex, and I explained that thoughts aren't permanent and what a child thinks one day isn't representative of what they will always believe. People learn.[/QUOTE]
Much like my situation, that isn't always the case.
Media violence statistics conflict for many reasons, but one of them is that people are different. So why take the risk?
I totally missed your point when you said "we don't kill eachother but animals do so we're more sacred than animals". I'd like to point out that the [i]only[/i] reason we don't kill eachother is because we're afraid of the justice system.
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;27720449]I hope this isn't news to you, but humans are animals.
Lol I hope you're kidding.
Lets just ignore the fact that the American military has been non-stop killing people in other countries for 60 years. Oh and lets forget all the murder too.[/QUOTE]
Animals think nothing of killing, but in civilized countries, most people wouldn't treat murder the same way. If a person actually treated the life of another person as, say, a lion treated the life of an antelope, you would call him a psychopath, wouldn't you?
[QUOTE=commandhat;27719308]
Edit: I love how facepunch instantly rates me dumb. HE'S HATING ON PORNOGRAPHY HE MUST BE A MORON![/QUOTE]
Lol, I rated you dumb because that is not the reason why everybody has been rating you dumb.
[QUOTE=Billiam;27720436]I provided a clear, possible situation in which pornography can harm a child.
You can't just say "No it isn't."[/QUOTE]
Why not ban American exceptionalism in school and religion as well. They're both harmful to children as well. They both lead to the masses of drooling retards that are destroying this country.
[QUOTE=Xolo;27720500]I totally missed your point when you said "we don't kill eachother but animals do so we're more sacred than animals". I'd like to point out that the [i]only[/i] reason we don't kill eachother is because we're afraid of the justice system.[/QUOTE]
are you saying this applies to you, or are you just excluding yourself from this blanket statement which only covers "those brutes"?
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;27720449]I hope this isn't news to you, but humans are animals.
Lol I hope you're kidding.
Lets just ignore the fact that the American military has been non-stop killing people in other countries for 60 years. Oh and lets forget all the murder too.[/QUOTE]
We're not perfect, but we have way more potential than animals, and we use it too.
We can harness logic and reasoning, along with thinking further ahead, while animals typically respond to first reactions and instincts.
My family's adult accidentally watched spongebob.
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;27720502]Animals think nothing of killing, but in civilized countries, most people wouldn't treat murder the same way. If a person actually treated the life of another person as, say, a lion treated the life of an antelope, you would call him a psychopath, wouldn't you?[/QUOTE]
Yeah people get their panties in a bunch over murder, but everyone is just as capable of it in the right circumstances.
And secondly a large portion of America is cool with sending our young people over to Iraq to kill people over there.
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;27720522]Why not ban American exceptionalism in school and religion as well. They're both harmful to children as well. They both lead to the masses of drooling retards that are destroying this country.[/QUOTE]
American exceptionalism definitely needs to be thrown out, but if schools teach popular modern religion like they teach ancient theology and myth I'd be okay with that.
I myself am ok with being nude or seeing it - its not sexual for me
[QUOTE=Rubs10;27720554]
We can harness logic and reasoning, along with thinking further ahead[/QUOTE]
Yeah a handful of people can. 99% of the population can't.
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;27720607]Yeah a handful of people can. 99% of the population can't.[/QUOTE]
The way I see it is that so long as that 99% is not interfering with progress or law I am okay with that.
[QUOTE=Billiam;27720489]Much like my situation, that isn't always the case.[/QUOTE]
Okay. You got any sources to back up that claim? I have plenty of peer-reviewed scientific studies saying my claims are pretty accurate.
[url]http://en.scientificcommons.org/52590007[/url]
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12503513[/url]
[url]http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/wmbrts11&div=27&id=&page=[/url]
The last one is about how the government has no business regulating at what age people should be permitted to view pornography. Not entirely relevant, but a good read.
Nudity and sex is only viewed as bad, because people make it that way. There's really nothing harmful or "bad" about viewing it, no matter what age. The only harm that could come out of it, would be because of the rest of society viewing it as bad.
Look at nude beaches. Those places aren't filled with erections. Those people are so used to nudity, that they really don't care.
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;27720607]Yeah a handful of people can. 99% of the population can't.[/QUOTE]
Are you one of those intellectually superior guys?
The first two things are not working for me
[editline]28th January 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Rubs10;27720676]Are you one of those intellectually superior guys?[/QUOTE]
God everyone's just so DUMB aren't they, I enjoy being a genius don't you guys
[editline]28th January 2011[/editline]
You just copied and pasted the first three results from somewhere
[QUOTE=Billiam;27720626]The way I see it is that so long as that 99% is not interfering with progress or law I am okay with that.[/QUOTE]
But the 99% is comprised of people like you, why are you condemning them
I love how a few people bring up a valid argument on how pornography can harm a child, and all you respond with is, "NO IT DOESN'T"
Bravo, FP. Bravo.
I am remaining neutral, as I don't want to be brought into this argument.
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;27720529]are you saying this applies to you, or are you just excluding yourself from this blanket statement which only covers "those brutes"?[/QUOTE]
It applies to me and everyone else who's human
[editline]29th January 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=WarRocker32;27720712]I love how a few people bring up a valid argument on how pornography can harm a child, and all you respond with is, "NO IT DOESN'T"
Bravo, FP. Bravo.
I am remaining neutral, as I don't want to be brought into this argument.[/QUOTE]
Seems to me like you're putting your fingers in your ears and ignoring my points tbh
[QUOTE=Xolo;27720643]Okay. You got any sources to back up that claim? I have plenty of peer-reviewed scientific studies saying my claims are pretty accurate.
[url]http://en.scientificcommons.org/52590007[/url]
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12503513[/url]
[url]http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/wmbrts11&div=27&id=&page=[/url]
The last one is about how the government has no business regulating at what age people should be permitted to view pornography. Not entirely relevant, but a good read.[/QUOTE]
I completely agree with the last one, as I said, moral/parenting argument rather than a legal one.
The other two are unavailable to me, but
[QUOTE]The author describes the influence of pornography on children, focusing on pornographical material on the web. Most children escape almost uninjured from visualization of pornography. However some are either traumatized, or precipitated in a strict perversion. The consequences on adolescents are similar, though more complex. The hypersexualization of teenagers may become complicated by addiction (so called internet addiction disorder: IAD), isolation, and perversion. Recommendations for the parents are presented.[/QUOTE]
Is sort of what I am saying.
You posted three studies that you probably didn't read and are not available for us to read
[QUOTE=WarRocker32;27720712]I love how a few people bring up a valid argument on how pornography can harm a child, and all you respond with is, "NO IT DOESN'T"
Bravo, FP. Bravo.
I am remaining neutral, as I don't want to be brought into this argument.[/QUOTE]
That's ironic.
[QUOTE=Xolo;27720720]It applies to me and everyone else who's human
[editline]29th January 2011[/editline]
Seems to me like you're putting your fingers in your ears and ignoring my points tbh[/QUOTE]
Apparently you didn't understand who I was directing this to. I was directing that post to all the people who simply responded with, "NO IT DOESNT WHO CARES IF SHE SEES BODY PARTS".
You bring up valid arguments.
[QUOTE=Xolo;27720701]But the 99% is comprised of people like you, why are you condemning them[/QUOTE]
Yay for petty insults.
[QUOTE=Billiam;27720737]I completely agree with the last one, as I said, moral/parenting argument rather than a legal one.
The other two are unavailable to me, but
Is sort of what I am saying.[/QUOTE]
According to the study, the "some" mentioned comprise about .5% of the survey body. You think it's right to restrict the other 99.5% from viewing pornography because a small percentage doesn't respond to it well?
Oh, and also the 0.5% were almost all surveyed as being from "strongly religious" families
[QUOTE=ineedateam1;27720606]I myself am ok with being nude or seeing it - its not sexual for me[/QUOTE]
this is about a FIVE YEAR OLD
now that i think about it, being five would explain you being unable to read
So what? My brothers friend who is older watched porn on his netbook and if he had typed any word with a "p" in it he would have gotten about 10 porn sites pop up. Shit happens. I deleted the history and cache and didn't say a word.
[quote]In one study surveying 471 Dutch teens ages 13 to 18, the researchers found that the more often young people sought out online porn, the more likely they were to have a "recreational" attitude toward sex--specifically, to view sex as a purely physical function like eating or drinking.[/quote]
[quote]In the study, reported in the December 2006 Journal of Communication (Vol. 56, No. 4, pages 639-660), the team also found a relationship between porn use and the feeling that it wasn't necessary to have affection for people to have sex with them. Boys were much more likely to hold these views than girls, and they tended to hold these attitudes more strongly when they perceived the material as realistic, the team found.[/quote]
[quote]In a related study in the March issue of Sex Roles (Vol. 56, No. 5/6, pages 381-395), the Dutch team found a link between the type and explicitness of sexual media the teens saw and their tendency to view women as sexual "play things." The more explicit the material viewed, the more likely young people were to see women in these ways--and Internet movie porn was the only media type to show a statistically significant relationship, they found.
[/quote]
source: [url=http://www.apa.org/monitor/nov07/webporn.aspx][u]APA[/u][/url]
nice to have something actually readable for once
why are they all dutch
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.