The Student Room Group

Online Porn Ban

Scroll to see replies

Reply 180
I love how heteronormative this all is. The whole "porn oppresses women" argument keeps being made, apparently in complete ignorance of the genres of porn which don't. These arguments seem to come chiefly from the mouths of repressed straight guys who can't imagine any combination of sexual roles other than dominant man and submissive woman.

Blanket suppression of porn because some of it might oppress somebody is rather like blanket suppression of literature because some of it might offend somebody, or banning cohabitation because it can lead to domestic abuse. A side effect that might happen could be a distinct issue in and of itself, but it's not enough to justify such large scale censorship.

These arguments also fail to recognise that there are plenty of people for whom sex work, porn or otherwise, is their livelihood - and that they're content with that.
If you put a price on it less people would watch it, thus kids do not have debit/credit cards therefore this may solve the problem.
Reply 182
Original post by silver9
In all fairness I should have made my arguments more concrete. I don't have time to find too much evidence but let me try to make a few brief points and then let's see how people respond:

Issue 1: My argument is that porn should be banned by the govt to prevent children accessing it. Some people counter by saying that the onus to limit children's exposure to online porn should fall on the parent. My response is that many parents simply don't bother to control their exposure or the children get around any protective software so this is not an adequate solution. Children will find ways to obtain it unless it is legislated against at a national/global level.

Issue 2: Some people propose that porn is between 2 consenting adults. I propose that actually it is often not the case. In many cases women are in a desperate situation and so they are exploited by men who often mislead them about the nature of the scenes and then abuse them. If you would like to understand what I am talking about there are many sites that illustrate this for e.g. you can google 'ghettogaggers' (PLEASE BE WARNED THAT THE CONTENT OF THIS SITE IS DISTURBING) but there are many similar sites and in fact one famous recent legal case involved a pornographic actor called 'Hardcore Max' who was prosecuted for violating obscenity laws. Several actresses came forward to say that they had been misled about the nature of the scenes and that they had suffered severe psychological trauma as a result of being featured in these movies. Other cases involve sites such as 'hangingbitches.com' which was viewed by the killer of a young girl (again can't remember the case (I think it was Milly Dowler murder) but please investigate my claim to verify for yourself)-as a result the govt temporarily banned this site altho I think it is up and running again now (don't really want to check as I think it may violate UK laws to view the content). So my point is that porn causes real harm to people involved in the making of it and may in some cases cause people to imitate what they see in the videos which is often abusive and demeaning maltreatment of women. Yes it may be adults may get themselves into desperate situations but it is the govt's responsibility to legislate against the exploitation of these desperate people who mislead or take advantage of their situation.

Issue 3: I have been trying to mount an argument for banning or at least severe curtailing of internet pornography in the Western World. But in a large portion of the world porn has already been banned. So I would just like to hear why proponents of porn believe it is valuable and why it should not be banned? I can understand that erotica which usually shows romantic scenes between men and women to be acceptable but I struggle to get my head around why some people would actually go out on a limb to defend most internet porn which frames sexual relationships in a cold and disrespectful manner with many video titles referring to women as 'dirty slut' or 'filthy bitch' as standard practice. How is this beneficial to society? Wouldn't you like to see more positive messages conveyed about women to our youth? I mean I just don't get why anyone would vehemently stand behind this type of material-enlighten me please?


1) Your argument is that parents should be devoid of responsiblity. The logical conclusion to saying "parents simply don't bother" to look after their children should be either "so take their children and responsibilities away" or "so be it, free country". As you also say, children will always find ways. If you somehow managed to ban internet porn, it'd be back to the old days of kids sharing porn magazines.

Ban porn magazines and everyrthing and eventually those kids will experiment (moreso than nowadays) with EACH OTHER. That is the society you want? Teen and tween pregnancy is already the worst in the continent and one of the worst in the world, and you want more?

Also consider - if the kids will always find a way, perhaps it's not so traumatic and life-ending after all.

Whether you realise it or not, you're talking like a dictator. Freedom (or the extent we have it here) has its pros and cons. If you want a police state, you have to accept there will less and less things you can do in this country.

What was your upbringing? After all that you've said so far, you seriously think you're a better person with these totalitarist and discriminating views? It's bad enough that you don't really have evidence or even experience, but you actually ADMIT that and constantly point it out, yet still hold these views. Why? Because the newspaper tells you to?

2) Many people have been killed doing DIY. Many people have injured themselves doing DIY or fixing something themselves because they didn't have the money to spend on builders and the like. Should we ban all DIY shows?

A hostess in Japan was murdered and chopped into pieces by a maniac. Should we ban hostessing?

Children around the world are being forced into spending their days doing after-school and extra-curricular activities by their obsessive parents. Should we ban sports on TV?

Everything has a bad side. That is not porn or sex's fault, that's the human race's fault.

If the people are so desperate, they'll simply DO SOMETHING ELSE. They'll become a prostitute most likely, which is even more dangerous and unregulated, and less profitable.

What is this horrendous world you're creating, Silver9? A global dictatorship that runs people's lives for them, where all entertainment and independence is banned, and kids fiddle with each other in the school toilets.

The worst thing is that's not an exaggeration - using your logic, that IS your world.

3) This has already been discussed, and you can even use your Googling to find out more. By asking for it again, you're looking for a window to vindicate your views.

But is perhaps quite telling that it is incredibly obvious that you're a female. If you were male, your view would be different.

Original post by laurentommo
If you put a price on it less people would watch it, thus kids do not have debit/credit cards therefore this may solve the problem.


Porn already has a price on it. However porn is a business, so their sites, which you have to actively go on, will have free previes in the form of photos or trailers to entice customers. Also, the public themselves on the internet will upload content they've paid for to dedicated sites (such as porn equivalents of YouTube) so that others may enjoy it free or get a better taster of the site's content.
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 183
nonotrly I don't believe in this completely free society that you promote-I believe humans must be protected from themselves. People for centuries have not had the right to use the internet, now they have that right they must also have responsibilities. I feel that your view simply wants humans to have rights but not responsibilities and society cannot function optimally that way. IMO the govt must legislate against mass negative influences on society because it is very difficult for parents alone to stop their children from being affected by these. For e.g. if we didn't legislate against addictive drugs then these drugs would cause social problems regardless of parental attempts to stop their children using them. I think other forms of media that are not legislated against such as women's magazines have also caused tremendous harm to people leading them to be dissatisfied with their bodies and develop eating disorders. I believe it is very important to control and censor mass media's influence on society. I know I cannot convince you but this is my opinion-I do not think people should just be allowed to be exposed to every piece of garbage that is thrown at them-I believe that Western society has become far too liberal and obsessed with rights and there needs to be more emphasis on responsibilities-this is not being a dictator-this is believing in the benefits of a society that curtails negative media influences and encourages positive ones.
Reply 184
Original post by silver9
nonotrly I don't believe in this completely free society that you promote-I believe humans must be protected from themselves. People for centuries have not had the right to use the internet, now they have that right they must also have responsibilities. I feel that your view simply wants humans to have rights but not responsibilities and society cannot function optimally that way. IMO the govt must legislate against mass negative influences on society because it is very difficult for parents alone to stop their children from being affected by these. For e.g. if we didn't legislate against addictive drugs then these drugs would cause social problems regardless of parental attempts to stop their children using them. I think other forms of media that are not legislated against such as women's magazines have also caused tremendous harm to people leading them to be dissatisfied with their bodies and develop eating disorders. I believe it is very important to control and censor mass media's influence on society. I know I cannot convince you but this is my opinion-I do not think people should just be allowed to be exposed to every piece of garbage that is thrown at them-I believe that Western society has become far too liberal and obsessed with rights and there needs to be more emphasis on responsibilities-this is not being a dictator-this is believing in the benefits of a society that curtails negative media influences and encourages positive ones.


Since when did responsibilities equal prohibitions? Banning or restricting pornography just transfers responsibility for watching it away from the individual to the state. Parents will cease to have any responsibility, or any latitude, in controlling their children's access to adult materials. This sounds like the exact opposite promoting responsibility to me.
Reply 185
hahaha if this happens that would be hilarious! especially thinknig about most guys i know..

personally i wouldnt mind, im not a porn watcher but it is a bit annoying when your trying to stream a video and porn pops up. I dont get offended by this or anything though, so i dont have strong views either way.

I think maybe it should be a bit tighter, as in dont throw it our faces (some people/kids dont want to not have the choice..) but if someone searches it i guess then its ok? even if it is children.. apparently boys get into all this real young!
Reply 186
Original post by laurentommo
If you put a price on it less people would watch it, thus kids do not have debit/credit cards therefore this may solve the problem.


this - this is clever!
Just leave it. It is not the business of the government or ISPs what people view on their computers as long as it is not illegal (i.e Child porn etc.). Also, I don't think it is harmful at all and I think many who are against porn hold such positions because of religious/ideological beliefs, not rational thought.
Reply 188
I think all the benefits of porn that have been discussed can be accomplished with moderate porn e.g. soft porn and erotica. I believe that there is just no necessity whatsoever for violent/abusive/degrading porn-I don't think this really accomplishes anything beneficial whatsoever.
Reply 189
I could give very long and boring argumentative passage about it, but if no porn... how do we fap?
Original post by Daniel Freedman
This is the most objectively incorrect opinion I have ever seen


Why?
Reply 191
Original post by silver9
I think all the benefits of porn that have been discussed can be accomplished with moderate porn e.g. soft porn and erotica. I believe that there is just no necessity whatsoever for violent/abusive/degrading porn-I don't think this really accomplishes anything beneficial whatsoever.


There are things which exist between the extremes of 'soft' porn and 'violent/abusive/degrading' porn.
Back in the day of gAyOL (name stuck due to the terrible loading time. Hooray for dial-up! ¬__¬ ) my parents used passwords to stop me from going onto the Internet. If I wanted to access a certain site (Youtube, or a gaming site for cheats) then they'd unblock the site from the ban list.
That's called being a parent. It means protecting your kids from things that you don't want them to look at. It was effective too.
I can see that several people (the ones who want the blanket ban) clearly need a lesson in "How 2 Parent Properly".
A total ban would be ridiculous, but I agree that there should be restrictions. I see no problem with having to prove your age to view hardcore pornography. Minors need protecting.
Reply 195
Original post by shirley7
A total ban would be ridiculous, but I agree that there should be restrictions. I see no problem with having to prove your age to view hardcore pornography. Minors need protecting.


Protecting from what?

If a child of any age goes onto a porn site, they're there to look at porn. If a child doesn't like what s/he sees, s/he goes off the website and never looks again.

People underestimate kids to the point of insult, which is odd since they were kids once upon a time, and everyone will say they personally turned out fine.

I haven't seen anybody mention, or blame, the complete lack of sex education in this country, which is so bad it doesn't not give any info, it gives the WRONG info.
Reply 196
Protecting from what?

If a child of any age goes onto a porn site, they're there to look at porn. If a child doesn't like what s/he sees, s/he goes off the website and never looks again.


You assume that people know what is good for them. People choose to do loads of things that are bad for them like smoking and heroine because they are njoyable. The law exists to stop people from doing negative things that they themselves would like to do. If a child wants to look at porn or violence or whatever this does not mean the govt should allow them to.
Original post by silver9
You assume that people know what is good for them. People choose to do loads of things that are bad for them like smoking and heroine because they are njoyable. The law exists to stop people from doing negative things that they themselves would like to do. If a child wants to look at porn or violence or whatever this does not mean the govt should allow them to.


People may not know what's best for them, but why would the government know? I'm not a fan of porn myself, dead eyes doesn't turn me really, but I'm ultra liberal and restrictions should be kept to a minimum.
Reply 198
Original post by silver9
You assume that people know what is good for them.


So do you, hence your participation in the discussion.

So where are all the bat**** insane adults who have traumatised lives after seeing porn as a child?

Where is the perfect civilisation before internet porn? Y'know, the one that killed all the jews, invaded America and raped the women while claiming the land theirs, and which had multiple world wars?
Reply 199
Ok Nonotrly do you support movies where racists take poor black people and pay them to urinate and defecate on them? (guess what there is a porn site that does this-if you don't think that this is clearly wrong then you are devoid of morals as far as I am concerned) Also why should there be a legal age for sexual consent if a child agrees to have sex with an adult then this is fine right? If the child doesn't like it they can just not do it again. Surely banning these forms of freedom of expression would also be unfair censorship no? These are very similar to the arguments that you have made so far. Where do you draw the line and why?

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending