Lets make internet porn illegal

[Valmoon]

I voted no. I do agree that porn spam and any type of spam should be illegal. Purely for the annoyance factor. Same with spam phone calls.

Yes porn might have negative effects on people perhaps due to causing jealously and guilt in relationships but that isnt a compelling reason to justify banning it imo. Now if it can be shown that porn directly leads to at least 10% (number open for argument) of the people who view it to commit acts that are currently against the law then I would be for censoring/banning some or all of it. How it can be shown that these people would not have committed these crimes except for looking at porn is not my problem. Have at it.

Violent films, lewd music, etc I'm sure can all influence people to some degree. But for the most part I'm not for censoring material that the vast majority of people can enjoy responsibly for the sake of the few criminals who cannot.

[Pilgrim]

Yesterday @ 04:23 PM post located here
lordsnooty:

The image that paints for me is that his wife wasn't much cop in the bedroom.

after thinking about it Pilgrim decides to Moderate himself with apologies to Lord Snooty

You've just said that it's the woman's duty to live up to the image represented in Porn which is not a realistic image in the first place. To me that is the exact sort of statement that porn engenders in males. It puts all the blame on women and some would argue it almost sounds like an objectification of women because it sets them up in a comparison to pornography rather than seeing them as individuals with more to offer than what is in the bedroom.

[lordsnooty]

Today @ 07:18 PM post located here
Pilgrim:
That statement shows that you have already been corrupted by the unrealistic expectation of women that porn encourages.

Not at all. I find the kind of sex potrayed in pornography to be silly at best, and gross at worst. I know it's not in the least bit realistic, and thank heavens it isn't!

It shows that you already see women as simply an object to satisfy your sexual appetite.

I take such offense at that, I can hardly find words to describe it. I would ask you to either explain or retract that statement.

You've just said that it's the woman's duty to live up to the image represented in Porn

I said nothing of the kind, and I resent the implication that I did. I simply noted that some women are poor in bed. That is true whether you like it or not, and it says nothing about women being 'objects'. Men are poor too!

Paul

[Pilgrim]

I clearly explained it...when presented with the fact that one individual indicated a connection between his lack of desire for his wife and the images he saw in pornorgraphy you responded that you thought it was his wifes fault for not being better in bed.

My observation was totally reasonable though I am sorry it upset you so. Your extreme reaction might indicate that I hit pretty close to the mark with my observation.

[lordsnooty]

Today @ 08:13 PM post located here
Pilgrim:
I clearly explained it...when presented with the fact that one individual indicated a connection between his lack of desire for his wife and the images he saw in pornorgraphy you responded that you thought it was his wifes fault for not being better in bed.

I put that forward as a potential reason. If his wife was poor in bed (or he just didn't enjoy it for whatever reason), then that might explain why someone would turn to porn.

My observation was totally reasonable though I am sorry it upset you so. Your extreme reaction might indicate that I hit pretty close to the mark with my observation.

How would you like it if someone made a terrible slur against you?

I absolutely do not think of women as 'objects to satisfy my sexual appetite'. I think such implications are vulgar and intended to cause me offense. I think of women as human beings, and I have the deepest respect for them.

I demand an apology.

Paul

[Jimmy Higgins]

Today @ 03:13 PM post located here
Pilgrim:
My observation was totally reasonable though I am sorry it upset you so. Your extreme reaction might indicate that I hit pretty close to the mark with my observation.

I know if such a remark was made towards me, I would have reacted in the same manner as Lordsnooty. To assume such a crass personality from a single statement, that could be made in jest, is not a very good way about judging one's personalities. If you are a counsoler (sp!), you should know that.

[Pilgrim]

I am sorry Lord Snooty. My wording was poor and my attitude presumptive. Please forgive my posting in that manner. In fact, I will go back and delete the phrase about women as objects.

[Pilgrim]

Here is the edited post...

Today @ 02:18 PM post located here
Pilgrim:

after thinking about it Pilgrim decides to Moderate himself with apologies to Lord Snooty

You've just said that it's the woman's duty to live up to the image represented in Porn which is not a realistic image in the first place. To me that is the exact sort of statement that porn engenders in males. It puts all the blame on women and some would argue it almost sounds like an objectification of women because it sets them up in a comparison to pornography rather than seeing them as individuals with more to offer than what is in the bedroom.

[lordsnooty]

Today @ 11:03 PM post located here
Pilgrim:
I am sorry Lord Snooty. My wording was poor and my attitude presumptive. Please forgive my posting in that manner. In fact, I will go back and delete the phrase about women as objects.

Thank you, I appreciate that.

I'm sorry if I seemed to lose my temper, but I am quite sensitive to issues like this.

I have made decisions in the past that have baffled my male friends, but I made them simply because I do not see women as sexual objects, and would never treat one as such.

Cheers,

Paul

[Jimmy Higgins]

Still no statistical evidence in any form that shows pornagraphy destroys marriages.

[tgamble]

04-01-2003 @ 11:33 PM post located here
Epoetker:

Since Internet transactions aren't taxed...

Since when?!

[Eyeheart Pumpkin]

Today @ 06:18 PM post located here
tgamble:

Since when?!

Yeah, I was kind of wondering about that myself, as many times as I've seen tax added to my internet transactions. As far as I know, the only internet consumer transactions that aren't taxed are subscription transactions, and who knows, they may be taxed too and simply already have the tax figured into the total.

[Pilgrim]

For Jimmy...

Ok, I'm not Barna or anything but over the weekend I went to my files and checked into some facts.

Of 12 couples who came to me for counseling 7 of them involved conversations surroung pornography. In three cases men used words that were almost identical about porography when talking about their wives and the ways in which they thought their wives did not live up to what they thought was a sexual norm presented by such images.

In all the cases the women responed that they had felt objectified and unreasonably compared to unrealistic images which in turn made them feel distant and unwilling to be intimate.

Now I know that's not the most scientific approach, it's just the observation of my own load.

[lordsnooty]

Today @ 02:47 PM post located here
Pilgrim:
In three cases men used words that were almost identical about porography when talking about their wives and the ways in which they thought their wives did not live up to what they thought was a sexual norm presented by such images.

Could you possibly expand upon this please? What sort of things are we talking about?

From what you've said, it's difficult to form any conclusions.

Cheers,

Paul

[Pilgrim]

I'm afraid to get any more specific because of issues of confidentiality.

Suffice it to say, their views of what sex should be hadbeen formed by images they had viewed in pornography.