Iceland tries to ban porn and prostitution - will it work?

Post Reply New Topic

Is that so? Here are *your* posts from *this* very thread:


(For context, the above was a response to BDSM pornography)


... speaks for itself...


.. speaks for itself, as well...


I'd post the Ad Hominem card for the 4th time, but what's the point...

you seem to not want to discuss your porn viewing habits at all

why is that?

Perhaps because they aren't relevant.

You're attacking him and his character rather than actually dealing with his arguments.

"I'm not interested in the morality of pornography, as long as no-one else is harmed by it."

But people are being harmed by it when people use it to fuel their fantasies and then enact them in real life

I do have a problem with porn in general but I'd only want the extreme stuff banned

extreme porn is hardly innocuous either

You haven't given me one indication that all I said isn't true.

Would you then ban a whole host of other things that could be considered innocuous by many?

You go silent when I mention this. A trigger could be literally anything.

Religion is one of the biggest possible triggers for fruitcakes.



Why stop there?



And what's "extreme", pray tell? Give us some examples?

Most of the stuff you're thinking of does not cause permanent harm to the participants, and in many cases the people on-screen are actually acting out their own fantasies. Just like the people watching the porn. They are, in a harmless way, trying to act out their own fantasies, to please themselves. A lot of these people wouldn't want to or aren't able to do the things acted out on-screen in real life, for a whole range of reasons.

Your argument goes along the same lines of banning guns because they can be used to shoot people. Or banning knives because they can be used to stab people.

I have an issue with pornography where the pornography directly harms those people involved in its production. Like genuine child pornography, or genuine rape porn (not rape fantasy, of which there is quite a bit that floats around), and so on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophi ... n_of_proof

... In other words, grow up.

n the 1980s, conservatives and feminists joined to fight a common nemesis: the spread of pornography. Unlike past campaigns to stamp out smut, this one was based not just on morality but on public safety. They argued that hard-core erotica was intolerable because it promoted sexual violence against women.

"Pornography is the theory—rape is the practice," wrote feminist author Robin Morgan. In 1986, a federal commission concurred. Some kinds of pornography, it concluded, are bound to lead to "increased sexual violence." Indianapolis passed a law allowing women to sue producers for sexual assaults caused by material depicting women in "positions of servility or submission or display."

The campaign fizzled when the courts said the ordinance was an unconstitutional form of "thought control." Though the Bush administration put new emphasis on prosecuting obscenity, on the grounds that it fosters violence against women, pornography is more available now than ever.

That's due in substantial part to the rise of the Internet, where the United States alone has a staggering 244 million web pages featuring erotic fare. One Nielsen survey found that one out of every four users says they visited adult sites in the past month.

So in the past two decades, we have essentially conducted a vast experiment on the social consequences of such material. If the supporters of censorship were right, we should be seeing an unparalleled epidemic of sexual assault. But all the evidence indicates they were wrong. As raunch has waxed, rape has waned.

Results from the Czech Republic showed, as seen everywhere else studied (Canada, Croatia, Denmark, Germany, Finland, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Sweden, USA), that rape and other sex crimes have not increased following the legalization and wide availability of pornography. In addition, the study found that the incidence of child sex abuse has fallen since 1989, when child pornography became readily accessible -- a phenomenon also seen in Denmark and Japan.

The research results are published online in Springer's journal Archives of Sexual Behavior.

The findings support the theory that potential sexual offenders use child pornography as a substitute for sex crimes against children. While the authors do not approve of the use of real children in the production or distribution of child pornography, they say that artificially produced materials might serve a purpose.

Diamond and team looked at what actually happened to sex-related crimes in the Czech Republic as it transitioned from having a strict ban on sexually explicit materials to a situation where the material was decriminalized. Pornography was strictly prohibited between 1948 and 1989. The ban was lifted with the country's transition to democracy and, by 1990, the availability and ownership of sexually explicit materials rose dramatically. Even the possession of child pornography was not a criminal offense.

The researchers monitored the number of sex-related crimes from Ministry of Interior records -- rape, attempted rape, sexual assault, and child sex abuse in particular -- for 15 years during the ban and 18 years after it was lifted.

Most significantly, they found that the number of reported cases of child sex abuse dropped markedly immediately after the ban on sexually explicit materials was lifted in 1989. In both Denmark and Japan, the situation is similar: Child sex abuse was much lower than it was when availability of child pornography was restricted.

Other results showed that, overall, there was no increase in reported sex-related crimes generally since the legalization of pornography. Interestingly, whereas the number of sex-related crimes fell significantly after 1989, the number of other societal crimes -- murder, assault, and robbery -- rose significantly.

GCPViper, where are you getting those pictures from? I'd like to print out a set for debates IRL...

is there such a thing as non-genuine child pornography?!

why do you feel the need to qualify it with the word 'genuine'?!

http://reason.com/archives/2011/01/03/does-sexual-fare-cause-sexual



http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 111326.htm



So, nessa238 (and Iceland), you want to pursue a policy that's been scientifically shown to put women and children at greater risk of sexual violence due to your personal views, and you want to act judgmental towards people that disagree with the idea? I don't think we have an emoticon to address that situation, eyes can't be rolled that far, faces can't be palmed that hard, heads would have to be cracked open against brick walls, etc.

Also, it's perfectly possible to defend something that you don't have a personal stake in; for example, I don't do drugs, yet I defend the rights of others to do them because I don't think it's the place of the state to tell people what they are and are not allowed to ingest. I don't patronize prostitutes, but I support their right to openly ply their trade in an open and safe environment, rather than pushing them out to the margins where abuse is more likely to occur. This isn't a difficult concept to grasp, lawyers do it all the time, to name but one common example, so I'm going to consider continued smears directed at other members based on their advocacy as personal attacks, and act accordingly.

is there such a thing as non-genuine child pornography?!

why do you feel the need to qualify it with the word 'genuine'?!

It was only a matter of time before someone found a study that said child porn was a good thing

People can and evidently do produce studies to prove anything they like these days

who's children are in this child porn that's lessening the instances of child abuse?

are the children by any chance being abused to make the f-king child porn in the first place ffs?!

Good grief!

I'm leaving this debate right now as it's sickening me

It was only a matter of time before someone found a study that said child porn was a good thing

While the authors do not approve of the use of real children in the production or distribution of child pornography, they say that artificially produced materials might serve a purpose.