You're viewing a single thread.
Studies have shown that in places where porn is blocked, rape occurs at higher frequencies than in places where that is not the case, possibly due to higher levels of feelings of frustration and repression. This may be only one website now, but if others likewise follow the trend out of fear of litigation... then Texas may become a much more dangerous state to live in in the very near future, even compared to what it already is now.
Studies have shown that in places where porn is blocked,
rapefreedom occurs at higher frequencies than in other places **FTFY
(/s obv)
Yeah! Personal rights! Personal choice! We shouldn't have government telling us what to do.
Conservatives crack down on policies involving porn
Okay I guess they know what's best for me yes papa gubberment
So long as the libterds get pwnd. Which they definitely did. By blocking my porn. You see the way it works is uh...
Would you be okay with letting children freely watch people having sex? The issue is not with freedom its with what we allow minors to see. I dont know how it is possible to stop this, but I agree its a problem that needs to be addressed if possible.
I mean, unintentionally, but I've been walked in on by my little one before. You can't always control what your kids are gonna see.
It isn't rocket science; it's education. Being sexually repressed is a choice - a bad one. Sit down with your kids, teach them the birds and the bees, and maybe they won't end up with a completely unrealistic view of sex.
Sexual repression is the American way. Americans wonder why Europeans are buckwild in this regard, and it's because they have healthy conversations about sex and regard it as natural. They still have laws involving minors and all that, but their view is much more humanistic.
Unless the internet is dismantled and containerized, there's no realistic way to prevent minors from viewing porn. The problem is that American parents have puritanical views on sex and rely on prohibition rather than being uncomfortable and having a chat with their kids about one of the most natural things humans engage in because they themselves are prudes. It's the same reason people get all wound up when they see a pair of boobs, because they view them as sexual objects and not yet another part of the human anatomy. Mind boggling, but that's religious influence for you.
Important to always remember America started because a bunch of hyper religious folks thought the Church of England was too permissive, named themselves "Puritans", and sailed off to a new land. And many still hold to those warped values today
Many of there were kicked out for their repressive ways too.
Seeing sex accidentally of your parents is different than porn. Porn is unhealthy and is ruining minors and adults lives. If we have the capability to stop minors form seeing porn, then everyone should be on board with that.
Crime is ruining people's lives, if we can just make everyone demonstrate that they aren't committing crime at any given time, crime will go down. So everyone should be on board with that.
Strawman
Oh and the stupid child going into a strip club vs accessing something at home argument isn't?
Nope, you just didnt understand the comparison.
Yes I did.
Let me be direct. You are not able to understand the difference between something happening at a specific physical location, and access rights to that, vs something accessed via property not owned by that place. You, for whatever reason, either cannot, or refuse, to acknowledge that accessing data, on a device you own, puts the onus on you to stay within the law. If your kids are accessing some strip club's stream, on devices you bought them, or on your property, then it is you that needs to make sure they don't. Not the strip club, not the streaming platform, not the ISP. These "think of the children", reactionary laws, that place parenting responsibilities on outside entities, are simply wedges to reduce protections of liberties from the government. This is moral panic 101.
First sentence, I agree. Second, factually incorrect. 3rd, i agree, parents should be monitoring their children and teaching them about birds and bees for their age, giving them knowledge so they dont go looking cause they are curious.
Nothing said restricts websites in a whack a mole fashion as this will never work. Kids will always find a way around restrictions.
Porn is unhealthy, if you disagree then you are obviously wrong, and anyone with an ounce of wisdom could tell you that.
Did Andrew Tate sell you a bunch of pills to leave the Matrix as well?
Oh yes, they need an educated liberal or leftist to tell them what to do...
Strawman
Please show me the studies that prove porn is ruining minors and adult’s lives
Feel free to do you own research, I am not going to do it for you. "BUT THAT MEANS IT DOENST EXIST!!!" Sure, whatever you want to believe, feel free, there is no convincing people that want to believe something.
Nice cop out.
Great!
I saw printed and video porn right around the time I hit puberty, decades ago, before there was internet in every home. And my parents didn't have a scrap of it in the house. You think you can stuff that cat back in the bag? You wanna know what actually messed me up though? All the adults in my life absolutely losing their minds at the thought that I might be having sexual thoughts as a young teen. The guilt, shame, and denial of information is what messes up kids, because if they never told us anything, and made us feel horrible about it, surely we'd never have sex before marriage! Be careful, that can backfire on you.
Your kids are gonna see naked people doing it. You need to come to terms with that inevitability, and become the kinds of parents they can feel comfortable asking questions. Of course, growth is hard, and way too many parents delude themselves into believing that bringing some poor kid into this world bestows them divine wisdom and ultimate authority over what's best for that kid, and never learning another damned thing again. It doesn't. Parenting is a responsibility and a journey, not a coronation. Growing up doesn't stop when you have kids. You cannot shield them from reality. It's your job to guide them through it; to raise them into adults, not to keep them children forever.
You certainly have no right, or even ability, to legislate the nature of reality for others until you feel safe. That deluded fantasy is far more poisonous to society than people having sex on camera. It simply does not matter if you're uncomfortable with an aspect of parenting. The world does not give a fuck. Nobody ever said parenting was comfortable. Accept what you cannot change, and help your kids become functional adults. You cannot imagine how much I wish my parents had.
So then you dont seem to think any action is good, you are okay with children seeing porn?
Children seeing porn is the lesser evil in a choice of that or authoritarianism. The police are not allowed to just come onto property and demand everyone there prove they have the right to be. Does that mean that lots, and lots, and lots, of people enter property when they aren't allowed? Yes, does this mean that sometimes people get away with serious crimes? Again, yes. However the downsides of the 4th amendment are lesser than having cops forcing everyone they don't know to prove their identity and that they aren't doing anything wrong.
The 1st amendment means that people will be exposed to things, considered speech for legal purposes, that are not good for them. This is less bad than the government getting ever more control over speech. In order to to have freedom you will have to accept that bad things will arise from it.
So if children are at a strip club the government should not intervene?
Kids have never been allowed in strip clubs. You're using a slippery slope argument.
Uh, not thats not a slippery slope argument... Its an argument about how if there are things happening then we should stop them, even if you think its authortarian. So if we were able stop children looking at naked people, then we should do that too.
Looks like you didn't read or understand anything I said.
It doesn't matter whether any of us are okay with them seeing porn or not. They are going to see it. Do you think you can put that cat back in the bag? Do you think it matters whether your kids can come to you with questions WHEN, not if, they have questions about sex? The actions I think need to be taken are people like you growing up and learning how to actually parent.
You might as well ask whether we should be ok with them finding out about extinctions.
So since they will see it anyways, we shouldnt take action to try to prevent it?
Why do you think it needs to be prevented? Do you seriously still think it's possible to prevent? Do you think it matters whether your children can come to you about questions when they inevitably look at porn and have questions?
It's always bonkers (and rather telling) how conservatives always frame anything sex as pushing it directly for children, like not banning porn is the same as launching pornhub Jr.
I guess yall gotta project super hard to cover all the Republicans on the state level in multiple states that have actively been fighting minimum marriage age laws and incest laws.
"NOBODY IS ALLOWED TO TEACH CHILDREN ABOUT SEX, THEIR BODIES, OR CONSENT - until they marry uncle jimbob when they turn 10 and get pregnant"
Pornhub Jr is a great idea. You could have unskippable ads that teach sex ed topics like how to deal with puberty and preventing STIs. It would keep the kids off elsagate and you could satisfy their curiosity about adult topics in an age appropriate way.
Gotcha, you dont actually understand what texas was doing...
Texas doesn't understand what it is doing.
Yes, Texas needs an educated liberal to tell them what to do, they really showed how smart they were during covid...
Try doing your job as a parent, this "protect the children" act is such horseshit
So for the kids with shitty parents, should they just be allowed in strip clubs?
If the strip club is in their house.
Gotcha, avoiding the question because it points out your poor logic.
I didn't avoid the question. You made a a bad comparison.
If the strip club was streaming, and children could access it via their home computers, then no the strip club should not be held responsible. That is the parent's job, and if the parents suck, the parents need to suffer the consequences, no one else.
However, you have made statements that make me doubt there are very many authoritarian measures you wouldn't agree with, in regards to restricting access to porn, because you are one of those people who blames a disproportionate amount of society's ills on porn.
You zero clue how much I blame anything on porn. I blame most of societies problems on weak useless men and ignorant people that how no clue what reality is.
And you totally are missing what I am saying, let me be very direct; children accessing porn is not supposed to be happening, but it is. We stop it in real life, but dont do anything about it on the internet.
Did you know that a child accessing porn is illegal? Did you know that, when it is done in their on, or with, their property, the people responsible for that are the parents of those children, and no one else? The only thing these bills do are shift the regulation of personal life onto the government.
Yes we need a STRONG MAN to lead us all to REALITY! We just need leader who is a STRONG MAN that doesn't get distracted by pussy, weakling things, like freedoms, context, and viability. Just push government force onto everything I don't like! That will bring people to REALITY!
If you do not want something - an abortion, a vaccine, porn, to own a gun, etc. - then the solution is simply: do not take it. Beyond that, why heap heavy burdens upon other people, rather than offering to help?
I am saying that "children watching people having sex" is not the issue here. Some few sickos aside, I think MOST people are agreement on that point. The issues are all the other issues surrounding that topic - e.g. who should be the ones held responsible for stopping that.
Like, why not the parents? It is exceedingly easy to block websites from a home router, and from devices such as ipads, so why should the website be the one upon whom all of the blame and burden should go to? Will Amazon be next, b/c it is possible to find sex toys on it? What about Wal-Mart, b/c you can purchase dangerous ammunition there? For that matter, any child can go into a gun show and see rifles and ammunition on display - why are those not banned? Children have even been known to be able to purchase those weapons, which are literally lethal - which is far worse than merely seeing some skin!!!!
Fwiw I think you mean well, but are missing the nuances of this discussion. Children will end up seeing porn - someway, somehow, I guarantee you that it is possible, b/c that is simply how the internet works. It is like playing whack-a-mole and you can't stop them all, especially like 90% of all domain names are already registered to porn and pirate websites. This law will not have the effect that it is intended to stop - and there is a goodly chance that it will make things worse actually, bc when people go off the well-trodden pathways, they will find themselves in the... darker corners of the internet.
Then again, I am not a lawmaker, so what do I know. I was just sharing my thoughts, in case they would be of interest to you.
It's the parents job to parent, not the government or third parties.
There are numerous less problematic tools parents can use from parental controls to automated local monitoring to good ol fashion monitoring to good (read: not "abstinence only") sexual education.
Would you be okay with a porn website requiring a copy of your government identification and then turning your viewing data over to the government?
Do you trust the websites and government to not get breached or release data?
Or is this Mike Johnsons burner account and it's not enough to know what porn his son is watching?
I wonder how many adults here saw porn as a kid? If we're being honest, probably the majority. Kids don't find youporn unless they're looking for it.
There is a highly effective way of preventing kids accessing porn, by being a parent and watching them (ie, put the computer in a public area) and also installing porn blockers in parallel. That's the solution.
The problem with laws like this, is that they're easy to abuse and they're created by people who don't understand technology either (so they're happy to make tech less useful, or they'd even ban some of it entirely if they could be to level the playing field).
It's more important to keep kids away from unsolicited porn specifically and creeps, and that can be some simply by requiring a site warning and monitoring them online
It’s more important to keep kids away from unsolicited porn
That's how I've seen porn for the first time, when I was around 7. From advertisements. Physical ones.
One Slovakian pawn shop chain called "Breva" used this as an advertising strategy. Their advertisement leaflets (put into mailboxes) had nudes. I remember I secretly collected those.
Of course, they were reported for this a couple times, but all that happened was that they got into the news a few times. (Read that as "Free advertising") Based on news, it seems last occurrence of this was 2017.I mean, I remember its name because of that, so I guess it worked...
I was exposed to it when I was 10, back when the internet was just starting to take off. It’s not that big a deal…
It’s up to the parents to police their own damn spawn, not the government.
Stop being lazy and install parental controls. Your kids probably already know how to install a VPN and get arounf this.
My kids dont get open access to the internet alone.
If you hadnt noticed, most parents suck, they give their kids cell phones and social media. If kids are not "policed" by their parents and do things that are directly harmful and illegal like drinking alcohol, should the police intervene?
Sex as a whole should be demystified as a culture. I'm sure most people got into porn in general out of curiosity and the taboo nature of it certainly only makes it more enticing.
What we need is sex education that is so comprehensive/ in depth that it's mind numbingly boring.
Make them memorize the PH value of the uterus and how they affect the alkili levels of the spermatosa.
Just bog them down with the details and then they will give so much less of a shit about sex/porn in general.
Easy solution, watch your kids and don't act like they are somebody's else responsibility.
People like you make me want that feature where you can't see replies with more than 10 downvotes over upvotes. God, I lost so many braincells reading about your idiotic opinions and your inability to accept reality...
And I would like a feature that filters out young people or people that have zero experience so their comments are useless. But yet here we are...
What's your point? Are you advocating for increased rape here? What problem needs to be addressed? Kids watching porn? My kids don't. I don't know what this post has to do with that, but the Texas government isn't protecting my kids here.
The point is that Texas is trying to reduce porn for minors, that is what this whole thing is about.
And you think this law is effective at doing that?
When did I say that?
When did you even answer a single question, my friend? I don't think you are communicating honestly.
You are calling me a liar, I am not your friend.
Would you be okay with letting children freely watch people having sex?
Yeah, I was 16 when I started masturbating and I understand I'm a late bloomer. 16 is a child.
[citation needed]
Here's a couple. Not a regional porn ban = more rape like previous poster said, but this is the most relevant data I could find. ...and this data isn't great. My main takeaway from this search is that we need to direct some actual research into what access to porn does vs doesn't do. Also specific categories of porn - I wouldn't be surprised to learn that sexual violence increases with consumption of porn that glorifies rape; but then if porn made a point to model good practices around things like obtaining consent, I'd wager sexual violence probably decrease.
TLDR, it's a complicated question, so take these with a grain of salt, but among the most credible sources I found, they trended toward porn and rape NOT being positively correlated.
"Victimization rates for rape in the United States demonstrate an inverse relationship between pornography consumption and rape rates."
"The results showed that in none of the countries did rape increase more than nonsexual violent crimes [during a period of increased access to porn]. This finding in itself would seem sufficient to discard the hypothesis that pornography causes rape."
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2032762/
Not really a good block of text to quote, but the gist is: "Porn doesn't cause rape, but there's more going on than just direct cause and effect"
https://vawnet.org/sites/default/files/materials/files/2016-09/AR_PornAndSV.pdf
You can use Google. Oh wait...
"Trust me bro"
I'm sure you preemptively provide citations for every claim you make.
Plus when you consider Texas' abortion policies...
Might as well rename the state the Republic of Gilead.
Sounds like it works right into their plans for controlling the population by forcing people to give birth then. What a hellscape. I'm so sorry for the good humans that live there.
Why do you think they're doing it? Republicans don't get born out of consent.
Hah
More dangerous? You mean the amount of firearms littered throughout the damn state aren’t bad enough?
That's... not just a Texas thing, and yeah, bc saturation may have long been passed on that one, so this is newer territory to expand authoritarianism into.
As in, it was dangerous, but a look at its next door neighbor Mississippi should convince anyone that it can always become more so.
While I disagree wholeheartedly with the relevant law, this is an incredibly dangerous argument to make against it. It insinuates an innate propensity towards sexual aggression and ignores many other factors that might occur alongside such laws.
There might be a misunderstanding. I was talking about a correlation between areas where where porn is blocked i.e. repressive regimes and rape. Not necessarily a casual effect from one directly to the other, although that might not be able to be ruled out either.
Either way it is a question of fact, so not up to either of our mere opinions. Though I find that it is darn near impossible to find such things these days using Google - it refuses to show "relevant" results and instead tries to show only "recent" ones that it wants to promote, and DuckDuckGo is far too narrow to make that easy. So finding the full unvarnished truth is a research project that I do not want to undertake, though in case it helps to share my remembrance of having read such a thing once I thought I would offer. This is nowhere near my area of expertise so was only a comment not an authoritative statement of definitive fact.
Also there could be other factors involved - e.g. higher incidents of rape in neighborhoods that tend towards being poorer and more heavily religious in nature, e.g. within the United States that would be Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Texas, etc. I don't recall if the study checked for similar levels of poverty but with different religious leanings - if suitably comparable places could even be found.
So my statement was saying how sad it is that Texas is choosing to become more like e.g. Florida rather than more like e.g. California, or to remain more of its own separate thing as it has done in the past. Becoming "repressive" does not sound conducive to good health (especially women's health).
Sorry, I mistook you as indicating a casual relationship between the two. I do hope to find some data on the issue once I have time.
If you find it, let us all here on Lemmy know - it looks like people are very interested (I know I would be to see a refresher). The sad part is how this stuff has been known for decades, but people just ignore it - e.g. "just grab 'em by the p$#&y". There are some, like John Oliver and Innuendo Studios, who are doing fantastic work to spread awareness of matters that need attention (and Jon Stewart is back, sort of:-), but ofc that won't reach the ears of people who refuse to listen, and instead choose to highly regard those who spread fear and chaos, most likely purely for profit reasons.