GOP working to declare porn a health crisis (AKA bothsidesthesame)

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Mar 11, 2004
23,279
5,720
146
I think the problem can be solved just fine with proper parenting.

I would agree but I think there's other factors that make this a bit more complex than that. Not that I'm agreeing with these "crisis" callers, but I think sexual health should be addressed properly and parents can't always be expected to be the gatekeepers of that.

Also, ugh, are we really trying to recreate everything about the 80s and early 90s?
 
Mar 11, 2004
23,279
5,720
146
And its why I think porn should be kept from kids until they are old enough to understand it in context.

I don't think its that damaging to be honest though in large part because they lack the context for it. I think the important thing is to provide context for it at some point. I'm not advocating that porn should be freely accessible to children, I'm just saying its not a crisis and I don't think its particularly devastating if they happen to see it, and far more important is providing that system to provide context and understanding of sexuality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meghan54 and dank69

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,286
6,351
126
1. Porn is time wasted watching people have sex when you could be having sex.

2. Republicans will naturally be worried about porn corrupting people because it represents a profound temptation for them. It doesn't threaten me because I find it pathetic.

3. It shouldn't exist because it is emotionally empty and morally degrading. The first thing to go with mental illness is normal tender loving sex. Self hate creates the feeling of sexual inadequacy and it is that feeling that drives an interest in porn. Real sex via a loving relationship is off the table when self hate dominates.

4. Porn destroys naive innocence and sexual awakening in a loving relationship, a sacred and bonding experience that can last a lifetime and bring a lifetime of joy.

5. People who hate themselves substitute so called sophistication with and ego bragging with real sexual joy.

6. Sexual perversion is a good way to make youself feel worthless and that's the real attraction.

7. The suppression of sex by making it feel dirty happens in a religious context where the body is seen as the seat of evil temptation. It's not the body but the mind that is ill in that case.

8. More things
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
36,125
30,518
136
1. Porn is time wasted watching people have sex when you could be having sex.

2. Republicans will naturally be worried about porn corrupting people because it represents a profound temptation for them. It doesn't threaten me because I find it pathetic.

3. It shouldn't exist because it is emotionally empty and morally degrading. The first thing to go with mental illness is normal tender loving sex. Self hate creates the feeling of sexual inadequacy and it is that feeling that drives an interest in porn. Real sex via a loving relationship is off the table when self hate dominates.

4. Porn destroys naive innocence and sexual awakening in a loving relationship, a sacred and bonding experience that can last a lifetime and bring a lifetime of joy.

5. People who hate themselves substitute so called sophistication with and ego bragging with real sexual joy.

6. Sexual perversion is a good way to make youself feel worthless and that's the real attraction.

7. The suppression of sex by making it feel dirty happens in a religious context where the body is seen as the seat of evil temptation. It's not the body but the mind that is ill in that case.

8. More things
While most porn I think fits your definition there is also plenty of porn that is made from a place of love, any there is absolutely nothing wrong with that type of porn. Many people derive immense pleasure from being watched.
 
Last edited:

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
70,208
28,910
136
Kids will be able to continue to access their parents' porn until they reach the age of 26.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,286
6,351
126
While most porn I think fits your definition there is also plenty of porn that is made from a place of love, any there is absolutely nothing wrong with that type of porn. Many people derive immense please from being watched.
Can't say since I don't watch. But I do believe in organic shame.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
I think the problem can be solved just fine with proper parenting.

Tell that to School teachers that are told it's all their fault that their kid is stupid.

Don't get me wrong, I completely agree with your overall narrative though.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
1. Porn is time wasted watching people have sex when you could be having sex.

Yeah! Now let's just make all the women put out for all the poor kids with lack of money and that didn't win the genetic lottery of good looks!


If only things were so simple in life Moonbeam. C'mon bud, you know better.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
While most porn I think fits your definition there is also plenty of porn that is made from a place of love, any there is absolutely nothing wrong with that type of porn. Many people derive immense please from being watched.

Hell, plenty of loving couples like having it on while they have sex. I mean - just in general - damning porn as some kind of horrible thing you might as well damn any and all sex toys, lingerie, vibrators, etc...

All of these are just things that help supplement sex through brain stimulation.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,548
15,424
136
So regulating businesses not ok for the GOP but regulating actual people? They are totally cool with that.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
34,004
8,040
136
Oh noes, the children.
And where the !@#$ are the parents? Ever heard of CIPA? Ever heard of parental controls?

If you are retarded enough to let a young child roam the internet unfiltered and unsupervised, they're probably better off learning on their own than being stuck with a brain dead parent.

To that end, we could probably add better parental controls to routers so the parents could more easily refer to CIPA filters and what not. There's a pretty easy tech solution to this issue. If legislation approached it that way, giving parents choices, I would not be opposed to that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dank69

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Yeah! Now let's just make all the women put out for all the poor kids with lack of money and that didn't win the genetic lottery of good looks!


If only things were so simple in life Moonbeam. C'mon bud, you know better.

Homely girls want dick too, you know.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
36,125
30,518
136
Tell that to School teachers that are told it's all their fault that their kid is stupid.

Don't get me wrong, I completely agree with your overall narrative though.
I think you are ranting here about parents who blame teachers for their kids' problems, and if so, I agree with you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
The first amendment covers Nazis & porn the same way the second amendment covers guns. Oh, wait- only porn is a health crisis, of course...
 
Feb 16, 2005
14,061
5,405
136
sorry, your boss raw dogs porn stars while his wife is home, months after giving birth to their offspring. You have a negative net value behind your ideologies.
Fuck the fuck off with your hypocritical dogma
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meghan54

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,286
6,351
126
Yeah! Now let's just make all the women put out for all the poor kids with lack of money and that didn't win the genetic lottery of good looks!


If only things were so simple in life Moonbeam. C'mon bud, you know better.
For you:
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
38,198
18,669
146
Oh noes, the children.
And where the !@#$ are the parents? Ever heard of CIPA? Ever heard of parental controls?

If you are retarded enough to let a young child roam the internet unfiltered and unsupervised, they're probably better off learning on their own than being stuck with a brain dead parent.

To that end, we could probably add better parental controls to routers so the parents could more easily refer to CIPA filters and what not. There's a pretty easy tech solution to this issue. If legislation approached it that way, giving parents choices, I would not be opposed to that.
This thread has spurred a much needed conversation WRT parenting and the Internet. I'm a tech nerd with two sons. While I don't use parental controls like you suggest, I've had a pretty open-ended conversation going for a few years about what the Internet is good for, and why it's not a playground. I regularly describe it as a cesspool. The topic of Internet pr0n hasn't actually come up yet, but it will eventually.

IMO, it's the parents duty to discuss the topic of sex when the kid is ready. You might have to explain it anatomically or emotionally to start.

I don't think legislation is a good move here. The choices are already out there. One of the easiest ways to manage it in the home is through DNS services like OpenDNS. Who the f types in IP's for their favorite sites? Like you said, most SOHO routers come with some kind of parental controls. Both Windows and Apple products have parental controls. there's so many different methods out there, I feel like regulation is over the top.

However, if we moved to make the Internet classified as a utility and start treating it as such....I would be more inclined to agree with you.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,286
6,351
126
Self hate destroys everything, especially sex. Since self hate is universal and invisible to those effected, all societies are set up to accommodate to our deep and unrecognized mental illness. In this sick spectrum of symptoms that manifest as a result, there develops a dichotomy of reactions along typical lines. On one side we have the sexual prudes who have been trained to hate their natural healthy desires and become sexual Prohibitionists and those similarly trained who take their pleasure in sexual exhibition. These opposite expressions are opposite expressions of the same illness.

The depth of the illness, with sex a major prime victim, means it will be among the last issues in my opinion we will be able to fix. We will just live lives of utilitarian accommodation to the range of expressions of our illness. Perhaps one day it will be different.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
36,125
30,518
136
Self hate destroys everything, especially sex. Since self hate is universal and invisible to those effected, all societies are set up to accommodate to our deep and unrecognized mental illness. In this sick spectrum of symptoms that manifest as a result, there develops a dichotomy of reactions along typical lines. On one side we have the sexual prudes who have been trained to hate their natural healthy desires and become sexual Prohibitionists and those similarly trained who take their pleasure in sexual exhibition. These opposite expressions are opposite expressions of the same illness.

The depth of the illness, with sex a major prime victim, means it will be among the last issues in my opinion we will be able to fix. We will just live lives of utilitarian accommodation to the range of expressions of our illness. Perhaps one day it will be different.
I'd be interested to hear why you think exhibitionism is an expression of illness.
 

1prophet

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
5,313
534
126
It's ironic and sad that once upon a time liberals and Democrats used to be the ones at the forefront against pornography for all the right reasons, predominately the degradation, exploitation and objectification of women and now having pretty much ceded that position to conservatives and republicans who feel porn is a threat for other reasons, instead of looking for some common ground on the issue, the current tribal mentality “ if the other side is against something we have to be for it” has taking hold in many liberal circles.

"As the pornography industry explores the darkest reaches of the human psyche in search of profits, liberals may want to rethink the assumption that only archconservatives would try to stop children from going there, too."


https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/17/...ral-parents-you-can-freak-out-about-porn.html

It’s O.K., Liberal Parents, You Can Freak Out About Porn

THE draft of the 2016 Republican platform released last week takes such conservative stands on sexual issues it begs to be made fun of. Particularly easy to lampoon is a plank calling pornography a “public-health crisis that is destroying the life of millions.”
How, critics ask, can Republicans say they’re concerned about public health when their statement of principles opposes a ban on military-style rifles and supports coal, which could destroy the lives of millions and their descendants by hastening climate change?
But non-Republicans would be foolish to dismiss pornography as a non-issue. Internet pornography is a real problem for the 66 million American parents with children under 18. Parents don’t have to believe that such material is a direct cause of sexual violence to be driven a little crazy by it. It’s bad enough that it’s giving our sons and daughters some very creepy ideas about how they’re supposed to look and act.
It’s easy to spot parents suffering from pornography-based anxiety. They obsess over whether the seventh-grader supposedly writing an essay is actually watching a free gangbang video on PornHub. They experience low self-esteem because they can’t figure out, or even find, a parental-control program that would filter out the gross stuff without restricting their children to just a few approved sites, making it essentially impossible for them to do web searches for their homework. I develop anger-management issues whenever I read an advice column telling me to keep a close watch on my child’s online activity, as if an adult could plausibly hover over a teenager long enough to ensure that he never clicks on 4chan.]

I was outraged when I asked the school my 12-year-old was attending to help me porn-proof the laptop we’d been advised to buy for him, and the school said no. As it turns out, that was more or less the only answer it could give. There just isn’t a good way to keep a curious child from ferreting out graphic imagery.
Regulation hasn’t worked. Two bills passed by Congress to restrict minors’ access to pornography over the past two decades were struck down by the Supreme Court because they infringed on adults’ First Amendment rights. In one of those decisions, Justice Anthony Kennedy suggested that available filtering software should do the trick. (A third bill, the Children’s Internet Protection Act, requires schools and libraries to install porn filters on their computers; the court deemed it narrow enough to pass muster.)

It was easier to withhold pornography from children when people had to go to a bookstore, peep-show or movie for their voyeuristic experiences, and clerks and ticket takers could turn children away. On the internet — to paraphrase the famous cartoon — no one knows you’re a kid.
The global nature of the internet vastly complicates censorship. One suggestion is that pornographers use identifying markers like a special domain name, .xxx, to make their products easier to filter. But even if American producers complied, foreign ones might not. Besides, anyone can copy and republish anything, eliminating the markers.
In addition to making pornography hard to contain, the internet is making it weirder and weirder. Intellectual property theft and the flooding of the market by amateur sex tapes has cut into producers’ profits; they can compete with bootleggers and Aunt Fannie and Uncle Bob’s home videos only by coming up with more extreme scenarios.

In an essay last week in the online journal Aeon, the journalist Mark Hay lays out how the industry uses data collection to discover and satisfy the most outré desires. “You can boot up Pornhub, xHamster or any other popular porn tube site that collects videos from around the web, and there’s a decent chance that you’ll see a moving thumbnail of a topless girl in a diaper,” writes Mr. Hay, or “some other fetish you used to have to scour to the dark edges of the net to find.” The fetish that’s trending right now, Mr. Hay told me when I called him, is necrophilia — “artificial snuff films.”
I’m not against the proliferation of internet sexualities (nor is Mr. Hay — he wanted to be very clear about that). I just don’t want my preteens watching actors having sex with corpses, even fake corpses, before they’ve begun to date.

“It’s a really hard problem,” says Clay Shirky, an associate arts professor at New York University’s Interactive Telecommunications Program, and the author of eloquent defenses of social media. Mr. Shirky thinks it’s futile for now to try to control what his children do on the web. He serves as “IT support” for his family, including his 12-year-old daughter and 15-year-old son, so he sees their phones and computers, and is pretty sure he doesn’t “have anything to worry about.” He says that’s just lucky, and “when luck is your only back-up strategy, it’s really troubling.” Mr. Shirky believes that it’s possible to come up with a constitutional way to curtail children’s access to pornography; there just hasn’t been the political will to work on the problem.
Most other experts, however, say that there is no solution that wouldn’t backfire or flunk the free-speech test. The best parents can do is teach children to put disturbing material in context. “The key to parenting children around pornography is not to start an arms race with them by trying to block their access,” Danah Boyd, the author of “It’s Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens, wrote in an email. “It’s about equipping them with the critical sensibilities to interrogate the kinds of sexualized content that is presented to them regularly,” whether by “Game of Thrones” or pornography aggregators.
Contextualizing is a good idea, but we have to do more, because Justice Kennedy was wrong. Filtering software is not up to the job. Left-leaning parents shy away from a cause they identify with right-wing culture warriors, but I challenge any parent to affirm that it’s O.K. for her kids to become digital porn consumers at 11, the average age of a child’s first encounter.
My generation made fun of Tipper Gore in the 1980s, when she urged music companies to label record covers when the lyrics were obscene. I apologize to Mrs. Gore. She wasn’t stopping anyone from making music. She was trying to come up with a good-enough filter.
The songs Mrs. Gore objected to seem innocent compared with today’s raunchy, shall we say pornified, playlist. As the pornography industry explores the darkest reaches of the human psyche in search of profits, liberals may want to rethink the assumption that only archconservatives would try to stop children from going there, too.