sorry, that's what I meant You mean put this PRISM spying technology to a good use? I think Obama is way too interested in my facebook status updates than catching paedo rings...
Nudity, sexuality, the breastfeeding of children.... These things are second perhaps only to mitosis in the natural and primordial nature, their fundamental necessity. And we burden them with entire cargo ship's of abstract and ludicrous baggage. That a woman breastfeeding her child should cause offense is itself a perversion. The act defines us as mammals. That seeing an exposed penis or vulva should freeze a person in their tracks is to make the very method of reproduction a terror. I'm not a nudist in the sense that I don't go looking and exploring places where nudity is allowable, but whenever it has presented itself, I have no issue dropping trou. It's a penis, for goodness sake. It won't summon Cthulhu and doesn't have any other magical powers, despite the occasional brag. And within my own community, there's this:
Personally I can't see the government going through with this. I agree that they should act on things like child porn though as for the rest of it, they'd be better off just leaving it alone. Personally I don't watch it nor would I care much if it got banned but it bothers me how western governments criticise countries like China who censor the internet and then do pretty much the same themselves. SOPA is a good example of this.
You seem to be pro "normal sexuality" and extremely anti "porn." I said earlier in this thread that agreeing on a workable definition of porn is very difficult. What is your definition? What is the difference between "normal sexuality" and "porn" in your eyes? Also, are there compelling reasons for other people to accept your definitions? I've seen, and sometimes participated in, discussions of porn that went like this: "Film A is fine, but film B is disgusting!" "No, I think film B is fine and film A is disgusting!" And there's no meeting of the minds.
While I don't actually have a definition for either, in my opinion normal sexuality is an intimacy that is more than just, well, you know... There's love there, and there's a passion there that you don't see in porn. I think Jazzabel's trying to say that with porn easily available and located on phones and within a few clicks of a mouse, there is no minimum age in which a person can watch porn, and that's extremely damaging to our society. Not just in terms of what children would then think sex is all about (big-breasted ladies and six-packed men, the supposedly "perfect" match), but they have unrealistic expectations as well - long sexual "intimacy" due to viagra and other such things. Just look at this to see what it is doing all around us: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1277790/Two-boys-10-raped-8-year-old-girl-park-Hayes-west-London.html If this isn't enough to make porn less accessible to children, I don't know what is.
Maybe if we stopped calling it 'kiddie porn' and started calling it what it really is - 'child rape' then maybe we could isolate the most vile of perverts and deal with them first. If we could clear the airwaves of the filth that preys on children there'd be little or no need to start banning every level of porn.
I haven't read the last page or so of responses, but I thought I'd share my thoughts. I'm against banning porn (assuming it's porn involving consenting adults). First, like minstrel said, there's no consensus on what constitutes porn. Second, people who want to ban it seem to think that sex has to be an act of love and/or passion. Someone mentioned that some porn is unnatural. Well, what is "natural" sex? Third, why should people be prevented from consuming what they enjoy in their private lives? Fourth, the expression of pornographic ideas themselves do not cause harm to others. The bottom line is that the private creation and consumption of "pornographic" material is not the government's business.
But they want to keep a database of legal-porn watchers.... It seems like no one here will admit to it but I like a bit of porn (once in a while or it just gets boring), my wife does, we can enjoy it together (for about 5 minutes) then hey-ho! I'd hate to think I'd have to ring some cretin to opt-in because some politician wants to put me on a database like some depraved perv.
Sorry, it is needed. It's desperately needed. We need that here. It's corrosive and abusive. Even the so-called 'normal' porn watchers come to think of women and even children now as being for nothing but sex. Think of it this way: do you watch your neighbors have sex? Your grown children? Do your children watch you? It's not a spectator sport. This is called voyeurism. It's sexually deranged. It is NOT sane to watch other people having sex. We're not monkeys. If you need it for arousal in order to have sex with your own wife or girl friend, then something's very wrong. In this country, porn is considered natural and normal, when actually it's neither. Censorship in this case is not the devil--the porn is. In the past I don't know how many years, I haven't gotten asked out, but I've been asked to be a third three times, and asked to bed by two different married men. Pornography is corrosive. It's not needed, and under no circumstances should it ever be defended. I am a woman. I am not anyone's toilet. How many women out there go on one dangerous diet after another or have one cosmetic surgery after another because this porn crap dictates we be thin, attractive, and cooperative with any man who wants to have sex with us in any kind of disgusting deviant way he wants? It's us that go through that--not men. Porn needs to go. Addiction to it is to be sexually deranged. It's not normal at all. And as a society, we no longer know that sex is NOT for kids and so therefore kids are NOT for sex. We're truly sick. Porn needs to go. Sorry for the unpopular opinion, but anyone in the world can write a pee pee story or film a pee pee movie--it's not legitimate. 12 year old boys laugh and giggle at pee pees and farts. Adults are supposed to have grown up about sex at least by the time they're in their 20s. Our culture is caustic, especially towards women, and women and children are largely not safe anymore in this country.
Is there really such a thing as natural and normal sex? Who gets to decide what natural and normal are?
Are you serious, people who watch normal porn think of children as being for nothing but sex? I think people with those views need to go get laid. Not my direct neighbours but there are two lesbians down the road.... I think there's a difference between need and enjoy. Because threesomes and affairs are the result of porn? Hmm when was porn invented? Not sure there was much in the way of cave art or hieroglyphics on the sphinx and mental orgies were left right and centre since the year dot. Saying porn is degrading to women is so old hat. Have you seen the Porn Awards? It's kinda like the Oscars for pornstars. These women love it, they love the money, the adulation, the star status. It is completely voluntary, obviously there are exceptions but the US porn industry is highly regulated and thoroughly professional. If some men treat women badly, that's already in their psyche, if a guy watches a simulated rape and then drags a girl down a lane that's down to the guy who already had it in him and of course the violent scenes brought it out. I am talking about straight-up honest-to-goodness porn that does no harm to anybody. If you don't want to watch it, no one is going to tie you to a chair and make you. And as for using you as a toilet? I don't know what kind of porn you've seen but that aint on my channel.
If you feel the need to judge what other adult, consenting couples are doing in the privacy of their own bedroom because they don't conform to your vanilla stereotype of 'ACCEPTABLE SEX,' then something's very wrong. Different things arouse different people, and while I doubt that many couples actually 'need' porn to have sex (you've twisted that interpretation pretty seriously), most people don't need lube or sex toys either (just a couple of examples). But if it enhances their sex life and isn't causing anyone any harm... why not? https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-nature Natural =/= always good. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause People have cheated and engaged in threesomes long before the dawn of internet porn. While I'm sorry for your plight, trying to blame porn is misguided. All mediums present 'idealistic' (note the inverted commas) views of people- why single out porn? As a naturally slender, lanky teenager, I ended up with a binge-eating disorder for the best part of a year after reading that 'no woman will ever want to go out with a man slimmer than her.' That one sentence caused me far more damage than porn has ever done. Despite that, the fact that many mediums present oft-unhealthy ideals doesn't mean they should be banned- unless you're suggesting I should be rallying for the banning of dietary literature? And obviously, porn doesn't dictate that men should all have six-packs, eight-inch penises and be able to last for at least two hours at a time either. It may have more of an effect on women, but don't try and convince anyone it's a one-way street.
Actually, there is "hieroglyphic" porn. I'm not going to link anything here because heaven forfend I give someone a stroke at the sight of depictions of sex, but just google ancient egyptian porn. People have been looking at and enjoying depictions of sex since they learned how to depict.
I find it oddly ironic that you remonstrate the immaturity of anyone who might write an erotic story or enjoy an erotic image and yet you yourself use the language of toddlers. Pee pee stories? Please. A mature adult should be able to say penis and vulva or vagina in any company without going red in the face. And you seem very focused on porn and women and children. Any porn I might watch would be gay porn. And I like my fellahs' grown. No women to be seen or objectified. Does this pass your test or will you now argue that gay porn is the epitome of misogyny because it obviates the need for women?
Anybody who believes porn is the cause and not the result of deviant behavior needs to wake up. Read the Old Testament. Whether you believe in the Abrahamic God or not, the ancient texts have received credence in their historicity. Women and men were gang-raped and passed around like rag dolls. OT laws had to be written to prevent people from having sex with animals. Daughters raped their father.... Not saying these acts are justified, but they existed long before Al Gore created the internet. Somebody just finally got around to making a movie about it Watch Nanook of the North. It is not uncommon for Inuits to swap wives as means of sealing a deal. Should we condemn those assholes, too?
Stay strong Erebh, the militia's on your back - some quite chilling POV lined against you. Irrelevant pop issue raised by generation dead.
Actually, you're right. Because later I did read it and realized my error. They made an interest and valid point. I just wasn't in the mood for bible bashing at the time, which clearly it isn't.
