Pornography & Censorship

[Mattman]

I just read this book about pornography - something like Pornography: Women and Civil Liberties.  Among the ideas that the authors espouse in it are that...

- Pornography is "propaganda against women", because it is based fundamentally on misogyny
- It objectifies women and makes them out to be nothing but sex tools of men; subservient
- Porn also reinforces negative racial stereotypes, depicting blacks as lust-crazed "savages"
- It may influence men negatively in their relationships with women, perhaps contributing to sex crimes
- The same attitude is prevalent in everything from soft-core pornography to horrific "snuff" films depicting torture and sex murders - that women are things to be used sexually by men however they choose.


The book is a collection of essays written by mainly female, feminist authors, but there are also many chapters written by male authors.  After reading it, I'm wondering again about whether pornography should be censored more.  I confess, I do watch porn frequently.  But I never feel good about it, and the book makes me think that it might really contribute to social problems.  I think there's a big difference between normal mainstream porn and these snuff films(absolutely horrifying to read about in the book), but the authors make the case that ALL porn should be abolished.  Even the Page 3 girls in a lot of newspapers (although that I actually support, because newspapers are targeted at both sexes...so they should either remove the scantily clad woman or add in a scantily clad man and make it equal).

What do you guys think?  Should porn be censored?  Let's try and keep it intellectual, though.  I don't want to have another "controversial" thread locked up - I want it to be a real examination of issues.

[elikovich]

Censoring porn will solve nothing.? See, that's the Ultra Conservative manner of solving everything.? Ban it.? Censor it.? Outlaw it.? They want fast answers.? They want easy scapegoats.? They want everything they deem a "problem" to go away instantaneously.? And they're so blinded by their fanatical "morals" that they actually believe censorship will solve all the problems of "immorality" in the world.? That's the feminist and religious right talking out of their asses, wanting to ban and censor everything that they don't like.

dizzy, i think you're vastly overgeneralizing what i would consider a legitimate stance of disagreement...i don't think it's a matter of fast answers...i think that opposing porn is a legitimate core belief of the religious right, it's not a quick answer...you make it sound like the religious right hasn't thought about the issue at all and is just throwing something out there...this is a core belief for these people, and you can disagree with it objectively, but i think it's very closed-minded to dismiss it completely

Secondly, the argument that women are "objectified" is invalid, because how would that explain gay male porn?? Are women objectified by that too?? Obviously, everybody in porns is objectified.? Sure it's exploitation.? But not of women.? Of sex in general.? The films are made by and for lusty individuals to enjoy.? No other reason.

i think you miss the boat on this one...i think the feminist claim that pornography objectifies women is completely valid...you said that you feel that everybody in porn is objectified...doesn't that include women too?...and i think you're reducing something that is fairly complex to a single degree of objectivity...i don't think it's that simple...in the vast majority of porn, women (not men) are treated as objects, in fact, i've never seen one where the man was treated like an object...you show me one video where the man is objectified to a higher degree, and i'll show you 20 where the woman is

you can argue that there is no other reason porn is created other than enjoyment, that's fair...i'm sure there's some conspiracy theories out there...but the major problem with this is that this porn serves to reinforce the societal stereotype that men are superior to women, which is exactly what the feminists are fighting

Thirdly, as far as sex crimes go, 90% of all rapes are perpetrated by violent impulses within the rapist's brain.? It isn't so much a sex crime as it is a violent crime.? Pedophilia is a sickness which is not driven by sexual urges.? So the "sex crimes" argument is invalid as well.

do you have evidence that supports this?...i find it hard to believe that rape is not driven by sexual urges...show me something here

The bottom line is that there isn't any real "defense" for pornography, but there doesn't need to be.? Is it exploitive?? Yep.? Is it lust-driven?? Sure.? But so what?? Nobody needs to justify its legality.

i disagree with you completely here...the whole point of this thread is to justify the legality of porn...saying that you have nothing to back it up makes your comments pointless in the context of a debate...free speech is an excellent defense for pornography

ed

[Where is Hassan Nasrallah ?]

and what about normal movies ? fighting ? murders ?
so we show a guy getting killed and it's fine because "it is FICTION " ?

porn movies are the more realistic movies that you can find. i am dead serious - i dont like porn btw, girls are always naked, i like girls in clothes lol -
porn is just showing how people can behave.
and it's wrong to think that these porn directors sit in a chair and think about weird stuff that they can put in movies. these stuff ARE in movies, because some PEOPLE do these stuff and LIKE to do these stuff.

fighting against porn is just like fighting against documentaries .... i mean porn is basicly a  documentary on people having sex (with a prettier girl than usual ...).

on the " women problem " ....., i mean these feminist can lock me up too (and 80 % of the male community here) cause my girlfriend is being OH SO OBJECTIFIED everytime we do it. and i didnt needed porn to do it ... i mean, this is sex what we're talking about ? what do they want ? they want men to ask " oh darling, can i penetrate you now ? is that ok ? "

this is a fake issue i think.
and again, i'd rather see a kid watch a nipple than a head explode ......

[elikovich]

and what about normal movies ? fighting ? murders ?
so we show a guy getting killed and it's fine because "it is FICTION " ?

i agree with you, i think you can make an argument that violence desensitizes us to the value of human live

porn movies are the more realistic movies that you can find. i am dead serious - i dont like porn btw, girls are always naked, i like girls in clothes lol -
porn is just showing how people can behave.
and it's wrong to think that these porn directors sit in a chair and think about weird stuff that they can put in movies. these stuff ARE in movies, because some PEOPLE do these stuff and LIKE to do these stuff.

sure, but my point is that this just reinforces the current societal stereotype, which is what feminists are working against, and i think it's a valid stance

fighting against porn is just like fighting against documentaries .... i mean porn is basicly a? documentary on people having sex (with a prettier girl than usual ...).

no sir, i disagree with you here...i don't think porn is in the "factual" genre

ed

[youngerformofaxl]

I think that if a parent doesn't like his/her kid to watch porn then you should block that child from seeing it until that child becomes old enough to watch it (18, 21 in some cases.) If you yourself don't like it, then don't watch it: Turn the television off or switch the fucking station!

I think that porn can give a bad view on women (and men in some cases) but I think it depends on the person watching it as well. For instance, I'm addicted to porn but I still dig and respect the ladies as much as I ever have. I think people need to take responsibility for their actions and quit blaming the porn movies, the horror movies and the music. Just like that guy blamed G'NR because he had commited murder. He blamed it on the song: "Used To Love Her."

Now, I live in Salt Lake City, Utah, and we only get the B-Flicks (porn movies without penetration) here and so I know all about censorship and all that. But, I think that at a certain age, you should be able to handle sex & violence. I think movies & music are just a scapegoat for a much larger issue.

[Izzy]

As long as pornography is only availble to consenting adults (and involves consenting adults observing the law....) then who the fuck cares? What's the problem? Only if it is not observing these criteria does any kind of censorship need to come into play. Objectifying people? They seem happy enough about their paychecks at the end of it all.....

There are one million problems with this world we need to be tackling before we even need to be thinking about dealing with pornongraphy

[GNR-Chris]

I think that censorship should be kept at a minimum, the world would be a better place if everybody lightened up a bit and became a bit more liberal.

Of course, there needs to be some censorship to protect children etc, but looking at a page 3 girl never harmed anyone.

[Izzy]

Of course, there needs to be some censorship to protect children etc, but looking at a page 3 girl never harmed anyone.

Lol just look what it did to Tim (Tj)

[Mattman]

One other issue that the book raised was the culture of pseudo-pedophilia in popular culture these days.  If you look at a lot of porn magazines and movies, the adult women in them are often depicted as young girls - shaved pubic hair, lollipops, pigtails...you know, the whole "schoolgirl" fantasy.  A friend of mine the other day said something along the same lines.  If you look at all the female pop idols these days, they just seem to be getting younger and younger.  Like Hilary Duff - she's only like 15 or something and she's already something of a sex symbol.  You had all these guys that were waiting for the Olsen Twins to become legal.  Then of course, there's the much-publicized trend of young girls wearing sexualized clothing like midriff-baring tops.  Are we living in a culture that seems to encourage pedophilia?

In mainstream culture, it's much more subtle, but in porn, you always get that kind of thing like "little Tiffany has sex for the first time!" and shit like that.  It's a little distressing.

[youngerformofaxl]

One other issue that the book raised was the culture of pseudo-pedophilia in popular culture these days.  If you look at a lot of porn magazines and movies, the adult women in them are often depicted as young girls - shaved pubic hair, lollipops, pigtails...you know, the whole "schoolgirl" fantasy.  A friend of mine the other day said something along the same lines.  If you look at all the female pop idols these days, they just seem to be getting younger and younger.  Like Hilary Duff - she's only like 15 or something and she's already something of a sex symbol.  You had all these guys that were waiting for the Olsen Twins to become legal.  Then of course, there's the much-publicized trend of young girls wearing sexualized clothing like midriff-baring tops.  Are we living in a culture that seems to encourage pedophilia?

In mainstream culture, it's much more subtle, but in porn, you always get that kind of thing like "little Tiffany has sex for the first time!" and shit like that.  It's a little distressing.

Yes, that is true. There was a store in the mall called Abecrombie and Finch and it sold little girls' underwear that said 'eye candy' on it. Now, this type of stuff is sick because for me, I like women, not little girls and shit.

[Doc Emmett Brown]

One other issue that the book raised was the culture of pseudo-pedophilia in popular culture these days.? If you look at a lot of porn magazines and movies, the adult women in them are often depicted as young girls - shaved pubic hair, lollipops, pigtails...you know, the whole "schoolgirl" fantasy.? A friend of mine the other day said something along the same lines.? If you look at all the female pop idols these days, they just seem to be getting younger and younger.? Like Hilary Duff - she's only like 15 or something and she's already something of a sex symbol.? You had all these guys that were waiting for the Olsen Twins to become legal.? Then of course, there's the much-publicized trend of young girls wearing sexualized clothing like midriff-baring tops.? Are we living in a culture that seems to encourage pedophilia?

In mainstream culture, it's much more subtle, but in porn, you always get that kind of thing like "little Tiffany has sex for the first time!" and shit like that.? It's a little distressing.

Yes, that is true. There was a store in the mall called Abecrombie and Finch and it sold little girls' underwear that said 'eye candy' on it. Now, this type of stuff is sick because for me, I like women, not little girls and shit.

I agree with what you guys are saying but... Hilary Duff's parents dont seem to protest their little girl being seen as a sex symbol.  They're too busy raking in the cash   So we can moralize about this (and rightly so), but if the girl's own parents dont protect her, what are we supposed to do?  Argue about this on a theoretical level? i.e.  Porn is dangerously veering towards pedophilia as we sit in our armchairs...  Or do we call Social Services and ask that Hillary Duff be placed in the proper care of real parents who would tell her to get a college degree?

As for feminists opposing pornography... they're quite hypocritical.  Currently, everyone & their uncle are going apeshit over SuicideGirls.  Even a lot of women think it's cool.  But it's still a bunch of girls showing off their pierced nipples and other erotica. 

But a lot of feminists dont care because it is the women choosing to objectify themselves as opposed to someone else (a man) putting them in a position of submission.  So basically, they (the feminists) are a-ok with women using their bodies to get ahead even though they scream and wail about women being treated like objects in the media.   

Nope, they haven't "thought it through" as much as they'd have you believe.? They believe sex outside of marriage (and hence pornography) is sinful.? So they protest it.?

I think it's more sinister than that, Dizzy.  Religious dogma aims to control people's lives and people's minds.  This necessitates controlling sexual mores and habits.   They say that a specific activity is sinful in order to gain control over that person's habits.  Thus, when a person does engage in a sinful activity like oral sex, he will feel guilty, and want the Church to pardon his sins.  Thus, they have control over him using guilt.  That's why being an atheist was (and still is) considered an atrocity.  (I use the word Church, but it applies to all religions really).

The fact that porn has never been proven to harm anyone is a MUCH better defense than "because the first amendment says we can do it."?

I view mainstream porn as akin to alcohol.  In moderation, it doesnt harm the viewer/drinker.  As for the people who make the porn, as long it's not children or people being forced into doing it (in which case it is illegal), then I just view it as another economic commodity with supply & demand.  So I dont think it should be censored.

[elikovich]

thanks for responding dizzy

it's not a quick answer...you make it sound like the religious right hasn't thought about the issue at all and is just throwing something out there...this is a core belief for these people

Nope, they haven't "thought it through" as much as they'd have you believe.? They believe sex outside of marriage (and hence pornography) is sinful.? So they protest it.? That's the simplicity of it.? As I said, take away religion (and feminism) and how many "legitimate" arguments are there against porn?? The religious types know that "because it's a sin" isn't going to get them anywhere, so they attempt to use "logic" as a means of dissuading people from watching or creating porn.? But where they err is in the statistical field.? If you're going to attempt to justify the censorship of porn, you have to point out its detriments to the whole of society.? And theoretical detriments (such as the ones presented by the religious right and feminists) are invalid because they are all driven by personal "morals" rather than actual, documented evidence.? Show me one shred of evidence that porn presents a legitimate detriment to any walk of society and I'll believe otherwise.? But the point is, these individuals can't.? They can pretty much put the words "I believe", or "in my opinion" in front of every sentence they formulate to protest porn, because they're not basing it on anything they've studied.

just to clarify, as a religious person myself, the reason Christianity opposes porn is that Christians view the body as a sacred object...it contains the soul...and, they argue, that pornography reduces the status of the human body from a sacredness to a simple object for lust

and you're right, there is no real "logical" argument...it is highly belief based

i think what we can agree on is that a religious belief is not a valid argument for enforcing a values system on an entire people, but it is fine for making individual decisions

and i think you're reducing something that is fairly complex to a single degree of objectivity...i don't think it's that simple...in the vast majority of porn, women (not men) are treated as objects, in fact, i've never seen one where the man was treated like an object...

You've never seen a porn then.? How is anyone (male or female) in porn NOT objectified?? They show men fucking.? They show women fucking.? You're telling me that even though both sexes are engaging in the same activity, the woman is objectified and the man is not?? What, is the man's "personality" emphasized or something?? ?Is the man presented as more "human"?? ?? Porn presents both men and women as fuck machines and nothing more.? Hence, they're both objectified.? What don't you understand about that?

i still think there's some differential degree of objectivity involved here...i would argue that women are treated more like objects than men

do you have evidence that supports this?...

Yep.? Ask any psychiatrist, criminal psychologist, doctor, police officer....basically anybody who deals with rape and rapists.? They'll all tell you the same thing.? This direct quote came from a police officer with whom I once spoke, "Rape isn't so much a sex crime as it is a violent crime."? Rape is classified as a violent felony before sex crime.? The 90% statistic came from an online study I read a couple years ago.? I searched for it, but I couldn't find it.? Not that I need to, because all you need to do is consult any cop, psychologist, or criminal laywer you know and they'll tell you the same thing.? Why do you think rape is called sexual ASSAULT?? Why do you think the word "attack" is used?? You shouldn't even need to consult anyone or review any study, because common sense tells you that men don't attack and harm women just because they're horny.? If they did, every man on the planet would be a rapist.

For the record, the other 10% is generally accounted to date rapes.? You could argue that those are driven by sexual impulses, however, they have never been shown to have been influenced by porn.

EDIT: Just found this link.? It's unrelated to the thread's topic, but related to this specific issue.? A very amusing satirical take on the way feminists view rape.? And it does contain statements about rape being an act of violence rather than merely sex.

http://www.zetetics.com/mac/rape.htmp

you're right here...i spoke with my friend who's an expert on this, and he agreed that rape is a violent crime driven most often by power...thanks for pointing that out, i didn't know that

saying that you have nothing to back it up makes your comments pointless in the context of a debate...

I don't need you to define the "context of debating" for me, I've done it enough times.

apologies for coming across as offensive

free speech is an excellent defense for pornography

No, it's a rather poor defense.? "Freedom of speech" is actually a poor defense in many instances in which it's used (abused) as justification for whatever the issue at hand.? The fact that porn has never been proven to harm anyone is a MUCH better defense than "because the first amendment says we can do it."? Fact is, many people rely on freedom of speech to justify every controversial issue at hand, when the rule issue is not whether you have the right to do it, but whether it is safe and reasonsable to do it.

i still contend that the civil liberties argument is the strongest one can make here...much like in music, many people decry the offensive lyrics, and i think the major issue here is not whether they cause harm, but whether anyone has the right to censor

ed

[GnRNightrain]

Censoring porn will solve nothing.? See, that's the Ultra Conservative manner of solving everything.? Ban it.? Censor it.? Outlaw it.? They want fast answers.? They want easy scapegoats.? They want everything they deem a "problem" to go away instantaneously.? And they're so blinded by their fanatical "morals" that they actually believe censorship will solve all the problems of "immorality" in the world.? That's the feminist and religious right talking out of their asses, wanting to ban and censor everything that they don't like.

I might be wrong, but wasnt "banning" your position on drugs and alcohol?

[SLCPUNK]

I might be wrong, but wasnt "banning" your position on drugs and alcohol?

You are wrong.? You're taking what I said way out of context.

Drugs and alcohol are an entirely different issue.? They are proven to cause harm people.? So any arguments against them (including the ones I formulated) are based on logic and statistics, not on personal morals, as the religious right bases their arguments on pornography.

I agree that alcohol is harmful, but there are religious groups that don't drink because of their personal morals/religious views. They view it just as the religious right views porno...harmful.

I'm sure you can find studies that show porno is harmful to the human mind and how it views sexual relations down the road.

And alcohol and drugs don't harm everybody, and neither does porno.

[GnRNightrain]

I might be wrong, but wasnt "banning" your position on drugs and alcohol?

You are wrong.? You're taking what I said way out of context.

Drugs and alcohol are an entirely different issue.? They are proven to cause harm people.? So any arguments against them (including the ones I formulated) are based on logic and statistics, not on personal morals, as the religious right bases their arguments on pornography.

I see your distinction, however, like SLC said I think you can come up with many statistics to prove pornography as being bad based on secondary effects etc.?

It was just a strong statement about banning, and it just made made me recall your posts in the drug and alcohol thread.?

So at what point does something cause enough damage based on statistics to ban?? If we start overturning every law that based on morality than we will have a lot of work set out for us.? Now if you say that morality based laws that dont have any effect on third parties are wrong (ie sodomy etc) thats one thing, however Im not so sure pornography falls into this category.?

[SLCPUNK]

And alcohol and drugs don't harm everybody

Now you sound ridiculous.? Drugs and alcohol have a pernicious effect each time one uses them.? I don't even need to explain why, because I've already done it in the appropriate thread.? Not to mention common sense tells you drugs are harmful.

But this is not the subject at hand, so this is the last I'll speak of it here, so DON'T ANYONE REPLY!? ?

WRONG. Some people do drugs and drink and they lead productive lives.

Some people watch porno and lead productive lives.

WHILE....

Some people drink and it ruins their life.

Some people watch porno and it triggers something bad in them.

So....I stand by my first post. You can't have it both ways.

[Doc Emmett Brown]

China's way to discourage internet pornography...? (http://p2pnet.net/story/2356)

China ramps up Net-porn war
 
p2pnet.net News:- Starting today, if a Chinese porn site is "clicked" more than 250,000 times, its owners could be jailed for life.


The sentence could be applied to anyone "engaged in the profit-oriented production and dissemination of pornographic materials through the Internet, mobile communication terminals and 'phone-sex' services," says the state news agency Xinhuanet here.


Reflecting a significant toughening-up of China's already strict anti-porn laws, "China's Supreme People's Court and Supreme People's Procuratorate jointly issued the interpretations Sunday on the application of law in handling criminal cases concerning the production, duplication, publication, sales and dissemination of electronic pornographic materials through the Internet, mobile communication terminals and phone-sex services," says the report.


"Depending on the seriousness of the cases, the sentences range from living under compulsory surveillance, detainment, taking into custody by the police, to various terms of imprisonment and life imprisonment," Xinhuanet states.


Nor will the new penalties be confined to people who use online porn for profit.


"[...]grave cases of non-profit production and dissemination of pornographic materials are also criminal and subject to punishment<' says the state agency.


"People who knowingly aid the production and dissemination of pornographic materials through the above-mentioned means are also culpable and will be punished."

In June, China's president Hu Jintao's issued instructions "to wage a people's war against pornography on the Internet".

I read somewhere that the Chinese government sells the organs of their prisoners...the poor dudes who get caught distributing porno are gonna lose their kidneys 

[Elrothiel]

Nooooooo porn should NOT be censored!!

For fuck's sake! Its the human body doing natural things!

Its noooot "demeaning to women" or "exploiting women" or anything ELSE like that! Its just a nice thing!!

Personally though I prefer word porn... By which I mean Literotica stylee things!

[Sin Cut]

wow, somebody has been digging at the archives.

Yes, ban porn, I hate the fact women looking at it and thinking of me 

[Elrothiel]

Yeees I was digging a bit...

And noooo!!! Don't ban porn!! How daaare ye! *gay hand slappage*