Philosophical-Social Discussion over Pornographic Materials

[Terthna]

I would be happy for pornography to be chased out of the public view into the shadows so that people didn't want to see it never had to.
Trying to eradicate it altogether would simply be more trouble than it was worth.

Is it in the public view though? I suppose that depends on what one considers pornography, but something like, say, Nicki Minaj shaking her butt at the camera falls a bit short of that description, in my opinion at least.

 

[Captain X]

One of the major elements, would be how much pornography addiction can move people down the road towards being the customers of sex traffickers. Note I'm specifically emphasizing can, not claiming it automatically will. Almost all customers of such have porn addiction, but not remotely all users of porn end up paying into the sex trade.

I'm going to have to press X to doubt.

Pornography encourages self-absorption. It's wholly about self-gratification, it's not at all about mutualism or doing something to serve another. That's not a healthy attitude to bring into a sexual relationship, or any relationship really. It also can build unrealistic expectations.

If one is not in a relationship this is hardly a problem. And while it may come as a shock to some people, some couples actually watch porn together to help get them in the mood, and for ideas, if you know what I mean.

So I'm not really seeing much in terms of harm that porn causes. The only argument that can really be made involves other crimes being committed to make it, and that's not really an argument against porn as a whole.

I've heard plenty of arguments against porn, and I've never come across one that I didn't think was just an attempt at legislating morality. The left is even getting in on that action, now - they're the new moral crusaders.

 

[Liberterrarium]

I've heard plenty of arguments against porn, and I've never come across one that I didn't think was just an attempt at legislating morality. The left is even getting in on that action, now - they're the new moral crusaders.

They're the same with movie violence. Society used to have public executions as family occasions, but watching Clint Eastwood shoot bad guys is going to corrupt us all.

 

[Deleted member]

Personally, I'm not fine with movements like that; because in my opinion, those "dangers" are nonexistent. Either they're entirely in the heads of those who think they do exist, are a direct result of the stigma against pornography itself, or it involves people just being people; i.e. utterly horrible to each other, regardless of the circumstances.

In other words, porn isn't the problem; people are.

Respectfully, this isn’t very charitable or respectful of you. People like In The Name of Love and I can cite source after source for horrible pornography addictions, families torn apart, human slavery, disease, mental pathology all linked to pornographic materials. I am approaching this as something of a principled paleolibertarian (just from a very different religion).

Why do you say it’s wrong for us to use every erg of our power and ability to deter people from looking at porn, as private citizens? Isn’t that just our freedom as much as it’s your freedom to consume it? This street needs to travel both ways and if you want something to be legal then you need to be prepared to endure being called a sinner for doing it.

 

[Terthna]

Respectfully, this isn’t very charitable or respectful of you. People like In The Name of Love and I can cite source after source for horrible pornography addictions, families torn apart, human slavery, disease, mental pathology all linked to pornographic materials. I am approaching this as something of a principled paleolibertarian (just from a very different religion).

Why do you say it’s wrong for us to use every erg of our power and ability to deter people from looking at porn, as private citizens? Isn’t that just our freedom as much as it’s your freedom to consume it? This street needs to travel both ways and if you want something to be legal then you need to be prepared to endure being called a sinner for doing it.

You may have something resembling a point there; but by the same token, if you're going to express a contentious opinion, you need to be prepared to endure being called a delusional fool for doing so. Correlation does not imply causation, which is something both you and The Name of Love seem to fail to understand. I could just as easily make similar arguments linking Christianity to all manner of evils; and I would not be lacking for sources to support them. You've managed to connect pornography to all these horrible things; congratulations! Now you need to provide proof that pornography is the direct cause, and not something else.

 

[Deleted member]

You may have something resembling a point there; but by the same token, if you're going to express a contentious opinion, you need to be prepared to endure being called a delusional fool for doing so. Correlation does not imply causation, which is something both you and The Name of Love seem to fail to understand. I could just as easily make similar arguments linking Christianity to all manner of evils; and I would not be lacking for sources to support them. You've managed to connect pornography to all these horrible things; congratulations! Now you need to provide proof that pornography is the direct cause, and not something else.

The Name of Love and I both know that science and the scientific method are very easily abused to support anything you want in the social sciences. I don't doubt that in a war of sources you could match us point for point with sources arguing pornographic material is healthy. Our system of beliefs which is founded very much in an understanding of the universe well-grounded in the western philosophical tradition (even if different flavours, Aristotle vs. Plato) tells us that society could benefit from outlawing porn. I can also see the argument that it is incredibly corrosive and dangerous to any kind of pluralistic State to do so. So the compromise is that we do everything possible to discourage and even shame the consumption of pornographic materials. I don't need to indulge Popperean Falsifiability to know that pornography is dangerous; I'm using inductive reasoning.

 

[Terthna]

The Name of Love and I both know that science and the scientific method are very easily abused to support anything you want in the social sciences. I don't doubt that in a war of sources you could match us point for point with sources arguing pornographic material is healthy. Our system of beliefs which is founded very much in an understanding of the universe well-grounded in the western philosophical tradition (even if different flavours, Aristotle vs. Plato) tells us that society could benefit from outlawing porn. I can also see the argument that it is incredibly corrosive and dangerous to any kind of pluralistic State to do so. So the compromise is that we do everything possible to discourage and even shame the consumption of pornographic materials. I don't need to indulge Popperean Falsifiability to know that pornography is dangerous; I'm using inductive reasoning.

Well I'm sorry; but that's not a compromise I am willing to make. Instead, I have a counteroffer; how about you don't shame people for not adhering to your beliefs, and those of us who don't share them won't shame you for having them, okay? Because you do not want to go down this road; as it rather closely resembles the society that our enemies have thus far built, where shame is used as a weapon to ensure conformity to a certain set of beliefs. One that both of us disagrees with.

In short, if you don't want to accept that being a Christian is a sin, don't ask me to accept that indulging in pornography is a sin.

 

[ShieldWife]

I don’t think that viewing pornography is a sin, though I think that a good argument could be made that a lot of people involved in the pornography industry have questionable morality and beliefs and also engage in some questionable practices.

I don’t think that it should be illegal, but the idea that there are 12 year olds out there learning about sex from these people is a bit distressing. Even without discussing minors, there are still young adults who could be influenced by some of the subtle or not so subtle lessons in the porn they consume.

 

[Captain X]

I don’t think that viewing pornography is a sin, though I think that a good argument could be made that a lot of people involved in the pornography industry have questionable morality and beliefs and also engage in some questionable practices.

Hardly the only industry guilty of that.

I don’t think that it should be illegal, but the idea that there are 12 year olds out there learning about sex from these people is a bit distressing. Even without discussing minors, there are still young adults who could be influenced by some of the subtle or not so subtle lessons in the porn they consume.

This is why good sex education is so important. Yet conservatives screech the same way about that as liberals do when I suggest that we should also have gun safety courses in public schools.

 

[ShieldWife]

Hardly the only industry guilty of that.

Absolutely. In fact, I’m of the opinion that non-porn entertainment is probably more dangerous for kids as it has all sorts of left wing messages catered to them and the parents don’t care. As a parent I try to keep a close eye on any media my kids consume and alert to what messages that media has.

This is why good sex education is so important. Yet conservatives screech the same way about that as liberals do when I suggest that we should also have gun safety courses in public schools.

Sex education, though, is pretty much mechanical. Kids learn about the biology of sex, how an egg is fertilized by sperm, etc. Does sex education prepare kids for all of the social and psychological consequences involved in sex, can it make a child alert to how a sexual partner may be exploiting them, can it teach them about flirting or dating? I don’t think that sex education can or even should cover the entire spectrum of issues that are involved in sex. It’s those the issues that are more socially and morally complicated than penis + vagina = baby where porn may lead kids astray.

Though, really, I’m not comfortable with the government (via a public school teacher) teaching my kids about sex much less morality.

 

[Deleted member]

Well I'm sorry; but that's not a compromise I am willing to make. Instead, I have a counteroffer; how about you don't shame people for not adhering to your beliefs, and those of us who don't share them won't shame you for having them, okay? Because you do not want to go down this road; as it rather closely resembles the society that our enemies have thus far built, where shame is used as a weapon to ensure conformity to a certain set of beliefs. One that both of us disagrees with.

In short, if you don't want to accept that being a Christian is a sin, don't ask me to accept that indulging in pornography is a sin.

The greatest challenge of a pluralistic society is that you must accept some of your fellow citizens are going to Hell and do nothing to stop this. I don’t believe in Hell per say and as an Esoteric Traditionalist I support the fundamental truth of most conservative religions. But what I mean by this is that it is a very difficult mental leap to not call out the Truth.

I am, frankly, governed by Thame and thus don’t think it socially acceptable to publicly shame people in a way that upsets social harmony; but the reality is, if someone wants to stand on a soapbox and cry out that pornographers are going to burn in a sea of fire, your own position allows for your only response to be telling them they are wrong.

 

[Captain X]

Absolutely. In fact, I’m of the opinion that non-porn entertainment is probably more dangerous for kids as it has all sorts of left wing messages catered to them and the parents don’t care. As a parent I try to keep a close eye on any media my kids consume and alert to what messages that media has.

I'm not even just talking entertainment - I have little doubt that most industries have questionable morality and beliefs and also engage in some questionable practices.

Sex education, though, is pretty much mechanical. Kids learn about the biology of sex, how an egg is fertilized by sperm, etc. Does sex education prepare kids for all of the social and psychological consequences involved in sex, can it make a child alert to how a sexual partner may be exploiting them, can it teach them about flirting or dating? I don’t think that sex education can or even should cover the entire spectrum of issues that are involved in sex. It’s those the issues that are more socially and morally complicated than penis + vagina = baby where porn may lead kids astray.

I guess I look at that and come to the opposite conclusion, which is that sex ed should cover those social and psychological aspects as well. Kind of like my gun safety courses, incidentally. I'd also make it so there is more than one class, spread out over a number of years, with subject matter appropriate to the age group.

Though, really, I’m not comfortable with the government (via a public school teacher) teaching my kids about sex much less morality.

And this is where parents need to step up to the plate and reassert themselves. Too many of them view school as a form of day care and don't much care what goes on there (until it's too late). Hell, recently there was some congress critter who pushed the idea of making the school day longer so as to be more convenient for parents working the typical 9-5 job (I think they were suggesting 8-6). On the one hand, I am very egalitarian and am not in favor of traditional gender roles being enforced, but on the other, I think people need to take a good hard look at themselves and do what is best for the children when they start having them, because the alternative is that you're a lot more dependent on the schools, and thus the state.

 

[ShieldWife]

I'm not even just talking entertainment - I have little doubt that most industries have questionable morality and beliefs and also engage in some questionable practices.

True, though I mention entertainment because it has the potential to influence people in the same way that pornography can.

I guess I look at that and come to the opposite conclusion, which is that sex ed should cover those social and psychological aspects as well. Kind of like my gun safety courses, incidentally. I'd also make it so there is more than one class, spread out over a number of years, with subject matter appropriate to the age group.

I don’t trust schools to teach sexual morality. In fact, if they taught it, they would probably be teaching out of some book designed in a university sociology department and who knows what crazy stuff that may include.

And this is where parents need to step up to the plate and reassert themselves. Too many of them view school as a form of day care and don't much care what goes on there (until it's too late). Hell, recently there was some congress critter who pushed the idea of making the school day longer so as to be more convenient for parents working the typical 9-5 job (I think they were suggesting 8-6). On the one hand, I am very egalitarian and am not in favor of traditional gender roles being enforced, but on the other, I think people need to take a good hard look at themselves and do what is best for the children when they start having them, because the alternative is that you're a lot more dependent on the schools, and thus the state.

Absolutely, parents need to step up and not rely on the schools or media to teach their kids important values. Which is one reason why I wouldn’t count on a sex-ed class to counter any potentially negative effects of watching pornography.

Then again, I am a hard core supporter of home schooling, I home school my own kids, and I advocate for others todo the same - so I wouldn’t suggest any dependence on public schools for anything.

 

[Terthna]

The greatest challenge of a pluralistic society is that you must accept some of your fellow citizens are going to Hell and do nothing to stop this. I don’t believe in Hell per say and as an Esoteric Traditionalist I support the fundamental truth of most conservative religions. But what I mean by this is that it is a very difficult mental leap to not call out the Truth.

I am, frankly, governed by Thame and thus don’t think it socially acceptable to publicly shame people in a way that upsets social harmony; but the reality is, if someone wants to stand on a soapbox and cry out that pornographers are going to burn in a sea of fire, your own position allows for your only response to be telling them they are wrong.

Which is what I've been doing, and will continue to do; pointing out where you, and anyone else, are wrong.

 

[Deleted member]

Which is what I've been doing, and will continue to do; pointing out where you, and anyone else, are wrong.

As you see it, Sir.

 

[Terthna]

As you see it, Sir.

Naturally. The marketplace of ideas is not for the timid.

 

[ShieldWife]

Naturally. The marketplace of ideas is not for the timid.

Do you think that pornography provides a social benefit?

 

[Terthna]

Do you think that pornography provides a social benefit?

Several actually. There's evidence to suggest that the increased proliferation of pornography, thanks to the advent of the internet, has contributed to a sharp decline in sexual irresponsibility, teen sex, divorce, and rape.

 

[ShieldWife]

Several actually. There's evidence to suggest that the increased proliferation of pornography, thanks to the advent of the internet, has contributed to a sharp decline in sexual irresponsibility, teen sex, divorce, and rape.

That’s interesting. Do you have some links to data and/or studies on this? I would like to see them.

 

[ShieldWife]

Maybe we should take all of the porn discussions to NoL’s pornography thread, so it won’t be stretched out over multiple threads.

https://www.the-sietch.com/index.php?threads/the-political-problem-of-pornography.1203/