Porn Misunderstanding

[Gishin]

• Decreased parental time and attention​
• Increased risk of encountering pornographic material​
• Increased risk of parental separation and divorce and​
• Increased risk of parental job loss and financial strain"​

Are these not legitimate and accurate risks? Where is the bias in this?

Also, please let me know what statements you hold as bias.

Like anything, irresponsible and immoderate use brings about negative consequences. This doesn't mean we ban it outright. In my opinion, alcohol is immensely more damaging to a home than pornography, however when used responsibly creates no risk at all.

 

[mont974x4]

What makes it "porn" instead of "art"?




Why do people look for something else to blame for their own poor decisions?

 

[FaithLikeARock]

4 out of 5? Are you sure it isn't 5 out of 7? Or 9 out of 11? Figures like this that are pulled out of the air (no accompanying substantiation) are only good for a laugh. Anyway, aside from the unintentional humor, can I assume the problem you refer to is that these teens aren't learning it from where they should: good sex ed classes in school? If so, why should one expect the porn industry to fix it?

That was taken from my own group of friends in HS and out of 10, 8 of them said they got it from porn. Is it a complete example? No. But I can't find a set number so it'll have to do. Considering I hang out in the in between, not druggies and bums but not perfect, preppy, fashion sensible. I'd think it's rather accurate.

 

[FaithLikeARock]

Well then, maybe sex education should make use of more videos. Realistic videos, that is (no excessive faked moaning or stupid role plays). I researched this topic a few months ago expecting to find a negative affect on sex education from porn. I was surprised by my own conclusions. If we think logically, everyone has a different way of learning. Some people are visual learners, some are auditory learners, and some are haptic (hands-on) learners.

Why not make it 5 out of 5 teens? Assuming an accurate video, it's better than learning from a textbook, an awkward lecture, or through unsafe sex.

I can't stand a lot of the inaccuracies of some porn because it ruins the suspension of disbelief...unless it's funny.

On a side-note, have you ever heard of SFW (safe for work) Porn?

We should all learn from Pam Stenzer.

She's awesome. And she comes right out and says "Sex is awesome."

 

[Washington]

I understand your point. Although I cannot speak for her, I would assume that any researcher tries to avoid as much bias as possible. Of course, one cannot eliminate all bias but most researcher probably try to. Is that not one of the first rules of any research method?

Absolutely, and peer review is one of the great tools that make sure bias is kept out as much as possible. Where peer review is absent then anything can be put into print.

I can understand why atheists/non Christians may vier away from a conservative writing but is it helpful to have this black and white thinking? "Well, this is completely bias so all of this is completely false."

Why the straw man? I haven't seen anyone say "This is completely bias so all of this is completely false."

Perhaps there is some truth to be told in that paper? For example the author states, "when a child lives in a home where an adult is consuming pornography, he or she encounters the following four risks:




Decreased parental time and attention

• Increased risk of encountering pornographic material​
• Increased risk of parental separation and divorce and​
• Increased risk of parental job loss and financial strain"​

Certainly there is some truth in the paper, but I don't know if it's necessarily those that you point out here. In fact, your last point seems almost absurd. ​

Also, please let me know what statements you hold as bias

You mistake a warning for particular knowledge.​

http://web.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.li...c0d93-dec9-4bec-b7df-43ee789f10b7@sessionmgr3

Let me know if it works!

It does not.

 

[Washington]

That was taken from my own group of friends in HS and out of 10, 8 of them said they got it from porn. Is it a complete example? No. But I can't find a set number so it'll have to do. Considering I hang out in the in between, not druggies and bums but not perfect, preppy, fashion sensible. I'd think it's rather accurate.

Then you need instruction in statistics. As an extrapolation to a larger population it is not accurate.

 

[bunced]

What makes it "porn" instead of "art"?

I would say motive - I would say that in order to be art, it has to make a comment on today's society and encourage questioning in the viewer of the art. It is the conscience of the nation and a way of expressing the feelings of people.

Porn however has only one purpose - to arouse. That is where it differs from art

 

[mont974x4]

I would say motive - I would say that in order to be art, it has to make a comment on today's society and encourage questioning in the viewer of the art. It is the conscience of the nation and a way of expressing the feelings of people.

Porn however has only one purpose - to arouse. That is where it differs from art

I would say it's the intent of the viewer. Certainly the artist does bear some responsibility but by and large, they are not responsible for our thoughts and what we do with their creations.

Also, porn does make a comment on society, encourages thought and expresses feelings.

Is it art because it's in stone? Paint and canvas?
Is it porn because it's a photo?

 

[bunced]

Is it art because it's in stone? Paint and canvas?
Is it porn because it's a photo?

No - art can be music, steel, poetry, whatever. But it all comes down to the intent and what it is saying to us, whether it be the pre-Raphalean themes of getting back to nature, the surrealist themes of worrying about the march of technology or the search for "perfection" in Romanticism (here's hoping my Art History is not tooo skewed), art is commenting on the society of the time and demanding self-evaluation.

If porn comments at all, it is simply encouraging an acceptance of the status quo. But by and large, the intent is solely to arouse, and therefore I maintain that it cannot be thought of as art.

 

[mont974x4]

you're entitled.

 

[Gishin]

If it were art, I wouldn't call it porn. That said, I have seen pictures and videos of people having sex that I would consider art.

 

[morningstar2651]

We should all learn from Pam Stenzer.

She's awesome. And she comes right out and says "Sex is awesome."

This is the first time I've heard of her.

Have you heard Joycelyn Elders speak before? She's the former surgeon general.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UikQ0uzqwWM

Here is another good quote by her:

Condoms will break, but I can assure you that vows of abstinence will break more easily than condoms.

Sadly true. At my high school, the winner of an abstinence-only scholarship was about 7 months pregnant at graduation. When they realized that she didn't keep her oath, they took away her scholarship... making it even harder for her to attend college.

 

[Everlasting33]

Absolutely, and peer review is one of the great tools that make sure bias is kept out as much as possible. Where peer review is absent then anything can be put into print.



Why the straw man? I haven't seen anyone say "This is completely bias so all of this is completely false."

Then perhaps discuss the article instead of immediately dismissing it because of suspected bias (and it is assumed). For example, if a Non-Christian research study were to be published about the positives of pornography, would too bias for me to read? Probably every paper has some type of bias. I read up on Jill C. Manning and she has some amazing credentials. This is not to say that it wipes away degrees of bias in her work, but it is more likely that it is credible and valid.

Certainly there is some truth in the paper, but I don't know if it's necessarily those that you point out here. In fact, your last point seems almost absurd. ​

Perhaps it is a risk associated with a person addicted to pornography. Some of the risks and effects of pornography occur because of addiction but some because of moderate use (such as marital dissatisfaction).

You mistake a warning for particular knowledge.​

It does not.

That is unfortunate. I found a couple research studies (not Heritage ) but I do not know a way for others to view them.

 

[Everlasting33]

I am not against the idea of adults responsibly consuming pornography. I think that for educated and mentally stable adults it can be fine and also a safe outlet for some people to explore their fantasies and open the lines of communication between spouses regarding sex acts.

On the other hand, I think that a lot of pornography helps to promote a very unrealistic portrayal of the way that women are and while I understand that the main audience it's being sold to is men--it makes the act all about men. Has anyone here ever seen pornography that portrays a sexual act where both parties are considered? Most of it ends when the man climaxes, it's done, with no regard to the woman involved. I think that it also can promote the idea that women will do anything for money, even things that the average woman might find uncomfortable or degrading.

When people say it objectifies women it is partly true. Of course, they are obviously consenting to the objectification. It turns a woman into someone that must do anything and everything with whoever because she is being paid and I think that is the most detrimental aspect of it.

Do I think it should be banned? As an adult that consumes pornography responsibly I do not think it should be banned, just as I don't think alcohol or other things that can be potentially damaging should be banned. But as a woman I feel a moral dilemma when I consider the effect it has on our social views of sexuality and gender.

Good points!

 

[Everlasting33]

Like anything, irresponsible and immoderate use brings about negative consequences. This doesn't mean we ban it outright. In my opinion, alcohol is immensely more damaging to a home than pornography, however when used responsibly creates no risk at all.

The way I look at it, there are more negative consequences and risks when pornography is entered into the home and family than without it. Just like there are more negative consequences when alcohol and drugs are allowed into the home and family. Bringing pornography into marriage and the family may or may not be associated with addiction, marital dissatisfaction, infidelity, and children seeing pornography. But one is risking a lot to do so and I consider it wise not to associate myself with pornography because of all the risks involved.

 

[TeddyKGB]

Have you heard Joycelyn Elders speak before? She's the former surgeon general.

And recipient of the single most breathtakingly idiotic censure in history when she was fired, by the Clinton administration of all things, for mildly advocating masturbation during a UN AIDS conference, in response to a question about alternatives to risky teenage sex.

To this day I can't believe I live in a purportedly enlightened Western nation wherein such a thing is even conceivable.

 

[DeathMagus]

• Decreased parental time and attention​
• Increased risk of encountering pornographic material​
• Increased risk of parental separation and divorce and​
• Increased risk of parental job loss and financial strain"​

The issues I see with this list of four "effects" as follows:

1. This is assuming that a parent's use of pornography is excessive and overly consuming their time. What if both parents were having sex instead? Or watching a normal movie? There are thousands of things parents could do that will "decrease parental time and attention" for their kids - is watching 45 minutes of porn a big deal?

2. This point is a circular reason, since it assumes that children finding porn is an inherently destructive experience. It then uses this premise to try to prove...that porn is an inherently destructive experience. I challenge the premise. Besides, what if a kid accidentally walks in on mom and dad having sex? Or encounters some of his/her parents' sex toys? Or sees some of his mother's lingerie? It's not a big deal. If we don't accept the premise that porn is inherently bad, this point doesn't stand.

3. This point makes the assumption that both parents aren't fine with the porn viewing. This, again, is a premise based on the idea that porn is bad a priori. If both parents are fine with the other using porn to satisfy their sexual needs when the partner is too tired/busy, then they are less likely to fight over things such as sexual frequency, etc.

4. Again, this one assumes that one of the parents disapproves of the pornography, so viewing is taking place at work (a stupid idea). If the wife is fine with her husband viewing porn, or vice versa, such viewing is far less likely to occur at work, and instead will be done in the privacy of one's own home.

In short, I think the list makes assumptions regarding the nature of porn in its evaluation of pornography's effects. Once you don't restrict yourself to the assumptions, the evaluation becomes faulty.

 

[Washington]

Why the straw man? I haven't seen anyone say "This is completely bias so all of this is completely false."

A straw man argument is an exaggerated or caricatured version of your opponent's position. It generally consist of a false premise designed to be easily shot down, but has no actual relevance to the issue at hand.
When you said

"I can understand why atheists/non Christians may vier away from a conservative writing but is it helpful to have this black and white thinking? "Well, this is completely bias so all of this is completely false."
​

You mis-characterize my warning as an assertion that the paper is completely bias[ed] so all of this is completely false. I neither said nor implied any such thing. I said that her findings "can be expected to present evidence and conclusions that have a distinct conservative bias." "Can be expected" does not equate with the definitive,"are." And my continuing remark about evidence does not encompass ALL evidence and conclusions. I intentionally phrased it so as to leave room for evidence and conclusions that do not have a conservative bias. Moreover, just because a paper is biased does not mean all or even any of its work is false; although, it is more likely than not that some of it will be.

Then perhaps discuss the article instead of immediately dismissing it because of suspected bias (and it is assumed).

And I didn't dismiss it, but rather warned against taking it at face value: be wary of what is presented and look for confirmation in other sources.

For example, if a Non-Christian research study were to be published about the positives of pornography, would too bias for me to read? Probably every paper has some type of bias.

That's why I emphasized the value of peer review. It helps keep such bias to a minimum. Research that is not peer reviewed is always suspect. ALWAYS.

I read up on Jill C. Manning and she has some amazing credentials. This is not to say that it wipes away degrees of bias in her work, but it is more likely that it is credible and valid.

Good credentials go a long way in establishing credibility, but it's no secret that even well credentialed scholars have purposely mis-presented their research. Hence, even papers from the most famous researchers undergo peer review. Manning's paper was not.

 

[Everlasting33]

The issues I see with this list of four "effects" as follows:

1. This is assuming that a parent's use of pornography is excessive and overly consuming their time. What if both parents were having sex instead? Or watching a normal movie? There are thousands of things parents could do that will "decrease parental time and attention" for their kids - is watching 45 minutes of porn a big deal?

2. This point is a circular reason, since it assumes that children finding porn is an inherently destructive experience. It then uses this premise to try to prove...that porn is an inherently destructive experience. I challenge the premise. Besides, what if a kid accidentally walks in on mom and dad having sex? Or encounters some of his/her parents' sex toys? Or sees some of his mother's lingerie? It's not a big deal. If we don't accept the premise that porn is inherently bad, this point doesn't stand.

3. This point makes the assumption that both parents aren't fine with the porn viewing. This, again, is a premise based on the idea that porn is bad a priori. If both parents are fine with the other using porn to satisfy their sexual needs when the partner is too tired/busy, then they are less likely to fight over things such as sexual frequency, etc.

4. Again, this one assumes that one of the parents disapproves of the pornography, so viewing is taking place at work (a stupid idea). If the wife is fine with her husband viewing porn, or vice versa, such viewing is far less likely to occur at work, and instead will be done in the privacy of one's own home.

In short, I think the list makes assumptions regarding the nature of porn in its evaluation of pornography's effects. Once you don't restrict yourself to the assumptions, the evaluation becomes faulty.

Like I said in a previous post, there are more negatives and risks (risk of addiction, spouse may struggle with feeling insecure and inadequate which may lead to marital dissatisfaction, inaccurate portrayal of women in porn, children too young getting their hands on it, waste of money...etc) than positives of pornography

Perhaps if you made a list of the advantages and disadvantages of pornography you may acknowledge more harmful effects and/or risks involved than benefits. For me, this is how I determine whether it is good and healthy to involve myself in such activities.

I certainly understand why individuals do not agree with me...but that is O.K. We all have a certain perspective on a topic for good reason and I cannot blame myself or anyone else for it.

 

[Everlasting33]

A straw man argument is an exaggerated or caricatured version of your opponent's position. It generally consist of a false premise designed to be easily shot down, but has no actual relevance to the issue at hand.
When you said

"I can understand why atheists/non Christians may vier away from a conservative writing but is it helpful to have this black and white thinking? "Well, this is completely bias so all of this is completely false."
​

You mis-characterize my warning as an assertion that the paper is completely bias[ed] so all of this is completely false. I neither said nor implied any such thing. I said that her findings "can be expected to present evidence and conclusions that have a distinct conservative bias." "Can be expected" does not equate with the definitive,"are." And my continuing remark about evidence does not encompass ALL evidence and conclusions. I intentionally phrased it so as to leave room for evidence and conclusions that do not have a conservative bias. Moreover, just because a paper is biased does not mean all or even any of its work is false; although, it is more likely than not that some of it will be.




And I didn't dismiss it, but rather warned against taking it at face value: be wary of what is presented and look for confirmation in other sources.



That's why I emphasized the value of peer review. It helps keep such bias to a minimum. Research that is not peer reviewed is always suspect. ALWAYS.



Good credentials go a long way in establishing credibility, but it's no secret that even well credentialed scholars have purposely mis-presented their research. Hence, even papers from the most famous researchers undergo peer review. Manning's paper was not.

You bring up a good point about peer review. Like I said earlier, I wish I were able to obtain more research articles about this topic. Perhaps I will try again.

Obviously, I do not believe our opinions about pornography will change because of this thread. But I assume we both feel somewhat passionately about the topic and we enjoy a good debate!

But for me I have never experimented with drugs and alcohol. Ever since I was a little girl I would see the negative consequences of both and it was not worth it to even try it. This is the same for pornography and I am not missing out by doing drugs, getting drunk, or looking at porn. But there are many who engage in these activities and are not addicted. Nevertheless, there are others who engage in these activities and the consequences are costly.

Everyone's opinion and perspective is different about this topic and it is difficult to not think, "well I am right and he/she is wrong." But it is important for me to acknowledge that we are have unique experiences that have created our current world view. To us, it feels right and it is crucial that we just respect and be kind to one another.