PORNOGRAPHY

korrill wrote:
Actually, the principles are the same.

korrill wrote:
Not the issue. Let me remind you about your assertion: Pornography is the cause of sex crimes.

korrill wrote:
Ad hom. I never said anything about whether I like it or not. That is not the contention. The argument presented is about cause. So please answer the question to the situation I gave:

fredms3 wrote:Ang sagot ko ay yung wala sa choices: Yung nagbenta ng gun sa bata..

But sa pornography may dagdag ang explanation ko.

harballah wrote:Tama po ang assertion ko kasi tanggapin mo man o hindi ay cause iyan ng mga maagang pagpasok ng kabataan sa sex.

Anong adhom sa sinabi kung nauunawaan kita kung paborito mo ang
pornograpiya, hindi ba iyan ang ipinaglalaban ninyo dito against us,
kung adhom pala sa inyo iyan ay ipagpaumahin ninyo.

Who was at fault in the situation?

a. The boy

b. The gun

c. The parents

MarcCatholic wrote:Kowya Korrill, nanonood po ba kayo ng porn at ok lang po ba sa inyo manood ng ganoon? Thanks po.

korrill wrote:
And even with what you are posting now, my original challenge still applies: Pornography is not the root of the problem.

It's an ad hom in the sense that you are targeting me personally in your reply instead of addressing the issue I raised. An argument does not need to be overly or openly insulting to be an ad hominem. The point that you would shift the focus to your opponent's person instead of focusing on the argument itself makes it an ad hominem.

That's not even counting the fact that I am not arguing for the acceptability of porn or even saying that I like porn but merely challenging the claim that porn causes sex crime. You can now add early onset of sex to that.

And I'm still waiting for your answer:

MarcCatholic wrote:Kowya Korrill, nanonood po ba kayo ng porn at ok lang po ba sa inyo manood ng ganoon? Thanks po.

harballah wrote:Korril, ayaw ko ng makipagtalo sa inyo kasi nga ayaw kung namis-interpretet ninyo ang sagot ko pero hayaan mong bigyan kita ng sampol kung saan nasabi kung ugat ng sex crimes ang pornography.

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/current-affairs-programs/07/30/10/failon-ngayon-tackles-child-sexual-molestation

Kung hindi man galing sa porno ang dahilan ng sexual offense ay isa rin iyan sa dahilan kung bakit nangyayari iyan.

The concern that countries allowing pornography and liberal
anti-obscenity laws would show increased sex crime rates due to modeling
or that children or adolescents in particular would be negatively
vulnerable to and receptive to such models or that society would be
otherwise adversely effected is not supported by evidence. It is
certainly clear from the data reviewed, and the new data and analysis
presented, that a massive increase in available pornography in Japan,
the United States and elsewhere has been correlated with a dramatic decrease in sexual crimes and most so among youngsters as perpetrators or victims.

In sum, the concern that countries allowing pornography would show
increased sex crime rates due to modeling or that adolescents in
particular would be negatively vulnerable to and receptive to such
models or the society would be otherwise adversely effected has not been
vindicated. It is certainly clear from our data and analysis that a
massive increase in available pornography in Japan has been correlated
with a dramatic decrease in sexual crimes and most so among youngsters
as perpetrators or victims. We have mentioned some possible influential
factors.

Assessed the relationship between pornography and
attitudes toward women in 2 correlational studies, and
tested the effect of nonviolent erotica on attitudes
toward women with 184 psychology students and 20 patrons
at an "adult" theater. Hours of viewing
pornography was not a reliable predictor of attitudes
toward women in either sample. Patrons of the adult
theater, who viewed more pornography, had more favorable
attitudes toward women than male or female subjects. In
Study 3, 75 students were randomly assigned to watch 4
hrs of erotica or 4 hrs of psychology films over 5
consecutive days. Manipulation checks showed a difference
in subjects perception of the erotic nature of the
videos, but attitude towards women were not influenced by
type of video.

The aggregate data on rape and other violent or sexual offenses from
four countries where pornography, including aggressive varieties, has
become widely and easily available during the period we have dealt with
would seem to exclude, beyond any reasonable doubt, that this
availability has had any detrimental effects in the form of increased
sexual violence. Especially the data from West Germany are striking
since here the only increase in the sexual violence takes place in the
form which includes the least serious forms of sexual coercion and where
there may have been increases in reporting frequency. As far as the
other forms of sexual violence are concerned, the remarkable fact is
that they decreased--the more so, the more serious the offense.

korrill wrote:

Please, do present it.

Who was at fault in the situation?

a. The boy

b. The gun

c. The parents

fredms3 wrote:

Wait ko muna ang comment mo sa sagot ko before i proceed.

korrill wrote:
You give a link to an advertisement for a show. What is that supposed to prove?

If you will provide a link, at least make it so that data can be seen, like these:

http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/1961to1999/1999-effects-of-pornography.html

Ateo wrote:I agree with Korrill. Pornography has never been shown scientifically as a cause of increased sex crimes. That is if you based on academic and scientific study, not on shrill "investigative kuno" reporting sa TV.

Ateo wrote:
What Saudi Arabia needs is more pornography and masturbation, NOT LESS. Walang wala na nga, kaya di na pwedeng bawasan. Dagdagan na lang. Saudi needs to release some tensions and need to think of something other than repressing sex. Jeez, both the Bible and the Quran had to talk about sex.

korrill wrote:

If you want a more specific answer, then no. Even the person who sold it to the boy is not the one at fault in the situation.

As for pornography: Please, do present it.

fredms3 wrote:We're talking here of a boy
-- then your answer is wrong. Both the boy and the one selling it will
be apprehended, and the gun confiscated.

Same logic with pornography.

Police have identified a child killed Friday afternoon after an apparent
accidental shooting. Dispatchers said some children had been playing
with a firearm in the basement of a building on the 3500 block of Purdue
Avenue.The 7-year-old was shot at about 4:35 p.m. when the gun
accidentally fired, dispatchers said.

fredms3 wrote:Now, just a very simple analogy:

What's the similarity and difference between a porno material and a Bible?

MarcCatholic wrote:Kowya Korrill, mapalad po kayo sapagkat ang kapanahunan mo siguro e di masyado matindi ang peer pressure at bi's sa paligid. At, siguro napakahusay nyo po magdala ng inyong paninindigan. Nagabayan po siguro kayo ng matindi paglaki. Pero, dapat hindi tayo magbubulag-bulagan na maaaring maging sanhi ito sa sex crime lalo na ngayon nagiging mapusok ang mga kabataan. Katulad lang din nung balitang napanood ko sa DOS na-apply nung bata sa kalaro niya ang mga napanood niya. Hindi ko nilalahat pero may posibilidad. Kahit naman hindi ka manood e kung talagang balahura pagkatao mo at tambay ka tapos maraming pokpok sa paligid mo e talagang kakasa ka sa tukso. Lalo na kung makakapanood pa. May kanya-kanya pong ugali ang mga tao, di po ba?

korrill wrote:

Sorry, but no. If that logic was to be followed, then even gun selling should be banned - even the legal gun shops.

And I forgot to mention it: the boy who accidentally shot the girl is only 10.

Consider that as you read the story again:





Based on actual data, pornography has not been shown to cause people to be rapists or criminals. On the contrary, it shows the opposite result.

It's easy to point the finger when the item involved is one that has perceived implications for harm. Let's change the focus.

Religion and the bible has been a motivation in many instances of murder. The justification for the witch hunts, for example, was the verse Exodus 22:18 - "Thou shall not permit a sorceress to live."

The (low) tally was more than 50,000 people who were tortured and killed.

So, why isn't the bible banned?

fredms3 wrote:1. Now you have the story to
tell, lols....anyway, sorry but the legal gunshops would not sell that
to a boy in whatever circumstances it may take.

fredms3 wrote:2.
You're not answering the question directly. Can you please answer it
from the viewpoint of a teenager -- age where 'kapusukan' is at its
best.

fredms3 wrote:So,
now you're telling me that even the Bible/religion can be used to cause
murder --- therefore it has a great part the way people are behaving
--- same logic to pornography therefore.

The concern that countries allowing pornography and liberal anti-obscenity laws would show increased sex crime rates due to modeling or that children or adolescents in particular would be negatively vulnerable to and receptive to such models or that society would be
otherwise adversely effected is not supported by evidence. It is certainly clear from the data reviewed, and the new data and analysis presented, that a massive increase in available pornography in Japan, the United States and elsewhere has been correlated with a dramatic decrease in sexual crimes and most so among youngsters as perpetrators or victims.

In sum, the concern that countries allowing pornography would show increased sex crime rates due to modeling or that adolescents in particular would be negatively vulnerable to and receptive to such models or the society would be otherwise adversely effected has not been
vindicated. It is certainly clear from our data and analysis that a massive increase in available pornography in Japan has been correlated with a dramatic decrease in sexual crimes and most so among youngsters
as perpetrators or victims. We have mentioned some possible influential factors.

Assessed the relationship between pornography and attitudes toward women in 2 correlational studies, and tested the effect of nonviolent erotica on attitudes
toward women with 184 psychology students and 20 patrons at an "adult" theater. Hours of viewing pornography was not a reliable predictor of attitudes
toward women in either sample. Patrons of the adult
theater, who viewed more pornography, had more favorable attitudes toward women than male or female subjects. In Study 3, 75 students were randomly assigned to watch 4 hrs of erotica or 4 hrs of psychology films over 5 consecutive days. Manipulation checks showed a difference in subjects perception of the erotic nature of the videos, but attitude towards women were not influenced by type of video.

The aggregate data on rape and other violent or sexual offenses from four countries where pornography, including aggressive varieties, has become widely and easily available during the period we have dealt with would seem to exclude, beyond any reasonable doubt, that this availability has had any detrimental effects in the form of increased sexual violence. Especially the data from West Germany are striking since here the only increase in the sexual violence takes place in the form which includes the least serious forms of sexual coercion and where there may have been increases in reporting frequency. As far as the other forms of sexual violence are concerned, the remarkable fact is that they decreased--the more so, the more serious the offense.

korrill wrote:

I know. But then, neither do adult shops sell to minors. And the
narrative I gave does not say that a boy bought a gun. It only stated
that children were playing with a gun.

Which raises the question of why you would continue to pursue an avenue
(boy was sold a gun) that is not there in the first place?

By the way, that is not a theoretical situation. That was a news report.



And what teenager's viewpoint would that be?

This is exactly the flaw of the assumption that pornography leads to
sexual deviance or to sex crimes. It is one that has been disproven by
the studies that have been done - most notably by the Australian
government.



Same situation. Wasn't it your assertion that pornography is bad because it leads people to sexual deviance? *

Well, I just presented a fact that the bible has led many people to commit horrendous acts - even up to the present.

So using your argument, why are you not campaigning for the banning of the bible?

====

* It seems you conveniently ignore what has been presented, so I'll post them again:

http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/1961to1999/1999-effects-of-pornography.html

The concern that countries allowing pornography and liberal anti-obscenity laws would show increased sex crime rates due to modeling or that children or adolescents in particular would be negatively vulnerable to and receptive to such models or that society would be
otherwise adversely effected is not supported by evidence. It is certainly clear from the data reviewed, and the new data and analysis presented, that a massive increase in available pornography in Japan, the United States and elsewhere has been correlated with a dramatic decrease in sexual crimes and most so among youngsters as perpetrators or victims.

http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/biblio/articles/1961to1999/1999-pornography-rape-sex-crimes-japan.html

In sum, the concern that countries allowing pornography would show increased sex crime rates due to modeling or that adolescents in particular would be negatively vulnerable to and receptive to such models or the society would be otherwise adversely effected has not been
vindicated. It is certainly clear from our data and analysis that a massive increase in available pornography in Japan has been correlated with a dramatic decrease in sexual crimes and most so among youngsters
as perpetrators or victims. We have mentioned some possible influential factors.

http://www.netspeed.com.au/ttguy/refs2.htm

Assessed the relationship between pornography and attitudes toward women in 2 correlational studies, and tested the effect of nonviolent erotica on attitudes
toward women with 184 psychology students and 20 patrons at an "adult" theater. Hours of viewing pornography was not a reliable predictor of attitudes
toward women in either sample. Patrons of the adult
theater, who viewed more pornography, had more favorable attitudes toward women than male or female subjects. In Study 3, 75 students were randomly assigned to watch 4 hrs of erotica or 4 hrs of psychology films over 5 consecutive days. Manipulation checks showed a difference in subjects perception of the erotic nature of the videos, but attitude towards women were not influenced by type of video.

http://libertus.net/censor/history/docarchive/920820-398az.html

The aggregate data on rape and other violent or sexual offenses from four countries where pornography, including aggressive varieties, has become widely and easily available during the period we have dealt with would seem to exclude, beyond any reasonable doubt, that this availability has had any detrimental effects in the form of increased sexual violence. Especially the data from West Germany are striking since here the only increase in the sexual violence takes place in the form which includes the least serious forms of sexual coercion and where there may have been increases in reporting frequency. As far as the other forms of sexual violence are concerned, the remarkable fact is that they decreased--the more so, the more serious the offense.

Here's a government publication of Dr. Berl Kuchinsky's research on the effects of censorship.

http://www.aic.gov.au/en/publications/previous%20series/proceedings/1-20/~/media/publications/proceedings/14/kutchinsky.ashx

Funny how it shows a decline in sex offenses in countries where access to pornographic materials is more lenient.

So how do you reconcile that data with your assertion?

fredms3 wrote:1. Exactly. Do you have that story when you asked it initially?

fredms3 wrote:2.Assumption? Can't you see what's happening in the world with respect to immoralities happening?

In the first place, porno itself is an immoral material. Importation of it is prohibited as well as its display and sale.

fredms3 wrote:Is immoralities not sexual deviance, not the result of sex crimes...Ask those committed such crimes and they will tell you that porno materials and likes were the reason.

As the criminal personality profiler for the Michigan State Police, I
can offer that pornography is used to enhance sexual fantasy and for
arousal. That this material would cause one to work themself up into a
frenzy and then commit a sexual assault would be a giant leap indeed. In
fact, one of the most popular magazines in prison amongst child
molesters is the J.C. Penney catalog (retail store), because it features
young boys and girls in their underwear. I believe that the person who
presented this study had a religious agenda. Wouldn't it be nice if all
we had to do was eliminate pornography and we could eliminate sex
crimes? Aside from the difficulty in defining pornography, I could show
a stronger correlation between the use of alcohol and sexual assault
than pornography and sexual assault.

fredms3 wrote:3. Yes, that's why it is prohibited absolutely.

Well, do you ask yourself what is the purpose of the Bible? Yes, i agree it can be used otherwise, but that's beside the point. The problem lies already with religion. So there's no point to campaign for its banning.

fredms3 wrote:With porno --- what's the purpose of this? nothing but to arouse immorality.

Having said, then why don't you campaign for porno's legality?

korrill wrote:

Yes. Did you read my initial post where I asked it? It appears you didn't.



1. It is an assumption. If you even bothered to read the research papers I linked to, you'd see the exact opposite.

2. Importation of pornography is not universally banned. It is governed by laws.



You really should do research before you spout such rhetoric.

1. Research has shown that countries with access to pornography had significantly lower rates of sex crimes - both adults and youth.

2. Various studies have been undertaken to see if that was true. If you even read one academic report on such studies, you'd have known that:

a. Countries that relaxed censorship of such materials witnessed a drop in sex related crimes.

b. Patrons of porn theaters were found to have more favorable attitudes towards women than the psychology student test subjects.

c. Japan, which has the most varied selection of pornographic materials, has one of the lowest incidences of rape or sexual deviance.

d. Col. Michael O Robinson, Director of the Department of State Police in Michigan in 19991, received numerous requests for validating such a claim that pornography leads to sex crimes. His reply:



So, yes, all data shows that your claim of pornography leading to sexual deviance is an assumption.



Now you're showing a double standard. Worse still, you're not even adhering to known facts.

You argue that pornography should be banned because it leads to sexual deviance, hence it is harmful. This despite the data that shows the opposite being true.

You dismiss the issue of banning the bible since it has been the basis of mass murder as unnecessary. This despite the evidence that shows it to have been actually so.

Basing on historical data, pornography has been beneficial to many countries in reducing sex crimes while the bible has been shown to be the cause of many instances of death and suffering.

Judging by those, the bible is more dangerous than pornography. So why should pornography be banned while the bible is not?

And since you stated that the problem was not the bible but religion, let's add a new dimension to the issue:

Why aren't you campaigning for the banning of religion since it has been shown to be the root of many instances of mass murder and suffering?



Not the issue at hand. The issue is for you to substantiate your claim that pornography leads to sexual deviance.

I have shown numerous data that shows the contrary - all from either academic or government institutions.

What data do you have to support your claim.

korrill wrote:

Two points, Marc:

1. The data I have shown from academic and government sponsored research actually show the opposite - free access to porn correlating with a drop in sex crimes.

Patrons of porn theaters have been found to treat women better than the other test subjects.

2. You actually hit the nail on the head. But I find it funny that you recognize the solution yet you still consider pornography as the root - this in spite of data that shows otherwise.