Results 41 to 60 of 64
LSD writes
How do you know? Have you seen statistics on it from a reputable source, and if so, can you post a URL?
I've never even heard of that so i have a hard time believing its "the biggest thing in the industry now"...The pornography industry has hollywood film studios producing more titles than the mainstream movie industry, magazines with widespread international circulation, cable channels and access to direct TV and pay per view through hotels and cable providers. Anyone posting images of "actual abuse" can't be making any money off of it, because that would be providing evidence for their own prosecution, and the profits would attract prosecution.
I don't know exactly what you mean by "max hardcore" (that, frankly, just sounds like a very generic term for explicit porn) or "facial abuse" (is that term even actually used or are you just characterizing 'facials' as 'abusive'so i'm not sure if i can reasonably assess whether your characterization is accurate or not. I do know however that lots of people talk about all sorts of sexual things as 'degrading' or 'humiliating' when thats not necessarily the case.
In any case, I've seen covers of a lot of porn magazines in a lot london convenience stores, and a lot of obnoxious internet pop-up ads, and i've never seen anything especially degrading (embarrasing, yes, but not degrading), its almost all just sexually suggestive nudity. Of course, i'm sure if you actually seek the stuff out you can find something nasty, but given the stuff thats in the mainstream and easily available, its clearly a marginal aspect not representative of the whole or the most prominant parts.
Uh, i think i'll take your word for it, but the mere existance of two websites is pretty meaningless, anyone can make a website about anything that doesn't reflect on anything beyond it.
Lol the world wide web hasn't been here for decades and clearly theres no mainstream non-internet distribution of 'rape porn' so i think this claim is impossible.
Well, sure, but that that has very little baring on the broader question of pornography in general.
Body Count writes
lol i'm pretty sure they don't say either lines.
Some people like men with big cocks. Some people like black men. Is it astonishing that some people like both, and some people casting porn actors are aware of this?
Your claim is based on a particular, subjective interpretation, not whats objectively going on. White porn actors are also unusually well endowed, and yet because you're not looking for an interpretation that supports the claim "porn is racist" you don't see anything remarkable about the fact that white porn actors are also typically "horse built monsters."
This is one of the problems with trying to make political claims about the media, or specific medias, based on limited narrow examples taken in isolation...that methodology is capable of supporting essentially any claim.
☮☮☮☮☮☮☮☮
Max Hardcore and Facial Abuse are two porn companies.
Max Hardcore is well known for abusing women with very rough sex, spitting in there faces and urinating on them.
Facian Abuse is nothing but a bunch of guys spilling seamen on a girls face.
Sick sick people.
[11:40] <RedStar1916ista> dude get the glue
[11:40] <RedStar1916ista> were starting a revolution
I'm really not sure if there's been any scientific study of this issue. For the most part, I would imagine that serious social scientists tend to shy away from this kind of "obsenity".
Even so, the sheer number of rape porn sites out there demonstrates that it is a profitable business and, according to the producers, anyway, it's more profitabable than ordinary pornography.
Well, the term itself isn't often advertised and unless you actually study the subject, it's unlikely that you'd come across it. Even so, some of the most profitable and successful names in porn are producing effectively "gonzo" porn, even if they each have their own personalized "name" for it.
I could, again, provide examples, but this is the type of material that you probably don't want to look at.
Except that what they're doing isn't srictly illegal!
So long as the girls sign a release and consent form before shooting begins, there is nothing technically "wrong" with their subequent degradation and humiliation.
There's no risk of prosecution because there was no crime committed! That doesn't change the fact of what's on film, however, nor does it change that the content is specifically geared towards sadistic impulses.
The aim of this genre of film, after all, is humiliation. The more ashamed and degraded the woman is, the more the studio can charge. Tears are best, but if the woman can't be made to cry, simple acts of degradation will do.
And, no, this isn't a situation where degradation or humiliation are "subjective" determinations. No one viewing this material could reasonably state that it was not specifically made to be as degrading and humiliating as possible.
Hell, even the producers themselves advertise their products as such!
http://www.maxhardcore.com/
http://www.facialabuse.com/
There's a difference between soft and hard core pornography, and what you see in convenient stores and in internet ads tend to overwhelmingly fall in the former category.
Besides, softcore pornography isn't selling the way it used to. Sure, it's still around and you'll still find it in places where hardcore can't go, like convenience stores. Softcore content, however, has no bearing on the status of the contemporary hard core industry.
In order to gauge that, you'll have to examine actual samples.
I know that it's not "pretty" and I understand if that doesn't exactly appeal to you, but you really can't base your analysis of this situation on grossely unrepresentative "convenience store" examples.
You denied that rape porn even existed. I linked to two site lists (neither of which displayed actual porn, incidently) that link to dozens of rape porn sites.
So in terms of "anything beyond", I'd say that I've established pretty conclusively that not only does rape porn exist as a genre, but it's also a reasonably successful one given the number of sites out there working it.
And again, none of this is at all surprising given the high incidence of rape fantasies among both men and women. The way the market works, after all, is that if there's any demand for a product, someone will attempt to exploit it. And when it comes to rape porn, there is clearly a high demand to be exploited!
Again, rape porn doesn't portray actual rapes; rather it shows actors and actresses simulating forced sex. And since, at least, the mid 1970s, these kind of films have been available via mail-order catalog and even, in some cases, in specialized "erotica" stores.
The internet certainly made it easier to distribute this kind of material, but it was by no means the genesis of it.
Perhaps not, but it certainly has a bearing on how we politically address the issue.
As I see it, it's the liberal religion problem all over again. There can be no doubt that a blanket anti-porn stand would be puritanistic and counterproductive, but all porn is not equal and some porn is strongly deserving of criticism.
There is nothing implicitly "wrong" with pornography, but some people extend that rather self-evident statement well beyond its reasonable limit. Unfortunately, for many in the far left, pornography has become what religion is to liberals ...something you "just don't touch".
And while a retiscence to attack free expression should be applauded, an unwillingness to address misogynist imagery is eminently reactionary.
I would agree that 85% of pornography today is harmless in every siense of that word. But it's that remaining 15 that we need to deal with; and shying away from it because we don't want to come across as "feminazia" is cowardly and thoroughly hypocritical.
I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do, so I leave it up to you...
i also want to respond to one bizarre argument that has repeated itself- this notion that simulated rape and sexual violence in porn is somehow good bcuz it might prevent men from actually carrying it out.
firstly, this isnt the way porn works. it effects lots of people in lots of different ways, but just like anything in our contemporary culture (especially anything addictive 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8) the more someone gets the more they need. this is why the porn industry is famously almost supportive of peer 2 peer file sharing of their porn, bcuz it creates addiction that then makes people willing to pay for more. and the more many (not nearly all) consumers need, the more explicit or strange types they want. this is not a blanket statement for consumers, it is a minority probably, but its still true- and that means people with exposure to violent porn are more likely to carry it out, not less.
and secondly, this argument is bizarre at its very core. should we have simulated videos of lynchings of Black or Brown people for white racists, or simulated videos of argentine or chilean torture for possible coup plotters? if the argument is that violent porn satiates the appetite for those who would want to carry it out in real life, then why not have simulated child porn? bcuz the reality is that it doesnt quench the thirst, it actually feeds the need for more.
Firstly, "addictive" as a word has a specific meaning and one which does not include external stimuli like images or films. One can be addicted to cocaine, one can be addicted to alchohol, one cannot be addicted to porn.
Pornogrpahy satisfies a basic human desire for sexual gratification. There is nothing "wrong" or "bizarre" with enjoying erotic imagery nor is it particularly likely to "hook" one into a "life of evil" or somesuch nonsense.
Frankly, this idea that porn is a "gateway" to a dark world of sexual fetishism is as luidcrous as the marijuana "gateway" theory that your ONDCP is so glad to bandy about. Neither, of course, have any basis in actual objective reality.
Evidence?
Because as far as I can tell, while the porn industry is eager to distribute samples and ads of its work, it is quite quick to prevent the "sharing" of its actual material
Indeed, the porn industry has been known to be quite letigious when it comes to protecting its exclusive content. It's just rather clever in using the marketing potential of p2p services.
If that were true then we would expect to see a balooning in rapes in recent years.
Virtually no one on the anti-porn side of the argument denies that access to porn, and especially "extreme" porn, has increased in the last few years. If your hypothesis were correct, the number of rapes should have increased proportionaly.
In reality, however, the number of rape cases has been dropping substantially since 1979. There are now fewer than 15% of the number of rapes there were before rape porn became as widely available as it is today.
Understand, I am not denying that a good deal of porn out there is misogynist or abusive in nature and I am not saying that that which is shouldn't be roundly critisized as such.
What I am saying though is that it's time that we drop this hyperbolic language and acknowledge that while violent porn may have a social impact, it's not nearly as strong or as distinct an impact as those in the right and "radical" feminist camps would propose.
Looking at rape porn may subtley change how one views women, it certainly may change how one views rape; but it will not make an otherwise normal individual "a rapist".
The human mind is simply not that simplistic!
Clearly you're missing the point here.
Racists and fascists are not "aroused" by violent imagery such as you describe, rather they engage in such activities because of the real world bennefits they percieve as emerging from them.
The reason that "coup plotters" organize a coup is to take over the government, not to "enjoy" the imagery therof. Those who enjoy rape porn, however, enjoy the imagery and the imagery alone.
That is, the 26% of men and 34% of women who experience rape fantasis have no desire to actualize that fantasy nescessarily, but rather the imagery of that fantasy is arousing in and of itself.
Therefore it is quite possible that pornography designed to stimulate that fantasy will satisfy them.
Rape fantasies have, by all indications, been around forever. They are certainly not "caused" by pornography nor will they "dissapear" if porn were somehow outlawed. But it is well within the range of possibility that, like any other sexual kinks, with simulation and fantasy, the need for actualization can be sharply diminished.
That's not to say that no one with a rape fantasy will every go out and commit rape; it does mean, however, that there's a decent chance that we can lower that number ...and that outlawing porn will almost certainly not help in that endeavour.
You do, actually.
Simulated child pornography is not illegal in the United States.
I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do, so I leave it up to you...
firstly, i wasnt talking about whether simulated child porn exists in the west. i generally assume that any bizarre fetish you can think of might exist in porn. i was talking ethically, morally, do people think it is right for such material to exist. i dont agree with this system and most of what it does allow, but i was using that example rhetorically to figure out how people feel about stuff like that. so, in my view, simulation is just as wrong or almost so as the real thing
next, racists and fascists are in fact aroused by their violence. havent you ever seen the parties and group picnics that were done around a lynching in the photographs? and the way the bodies were mutilated with glee for souvenirs? and torture in the fascist sense must be made to be pleasurable to its users in order for it to work. theres a lot of good research out there analyzing what it has taken for people to become career torturers or to make torture a commone element of everyday life in fascistic or brutal periods of recent history. rape is a form of torture
also, one of the most unsettling things about the discussion of rape within this thread is the total misrepresentation of it, which i am as much to blame for as others i suppose. rape is about power, not titillation. so are the acts of humiliation found in 'nonviolent' porn mentioned earlier. you dont have to be the one doing it to get off on the power of it- its torture and humiliation as a spectator sport.
next, who the hell is coming up with these stats about reduced rape rates in the usa since 1979? besides the fact that it is the least-likely-to-be-reported violent crimes, which means its impossible to know the truth and thus cant successfully be argued on either side (claims of increase or decrease) ive never seen laudable sources indicating a drop in rape since 1979.
how about this source frome the disaster center which shows that reported rape rate since 1979 were actually highest in the early-mid-1990s, and that the rate is about the same in the most recent year as it was in 1979? and the fact that the usa government alone assumes that only 39% of rapes are reported, when in fact that is probably much lower. this would seem to directly contradict your pretty outrageous claim:
and i have to say also, that any claim that any reduction in rape and sexual violence is due to violent porn is absolutely out of this world. there are huge feminist organizations and movements that have toiled endlessly for decades to fight crimes against women, including rape and the illegalization of abortion, and tons of other reasons rape or sexual violence might go down. dont thank the porn industry for that. what an incredible claim
frankly, some of these excuses from people in this thread i think help promote a rape culture within the activist community. i dont blame any of you for consuming porn, but i do blame you for being so desparately defensive of pornography. honestly, attacking porn doesnt even take self-criticism for a user, so just give up on defending it
firstly, i wasnt talking about whether simulated child porn exists in the west. i generally assume that any bizarre fetish you can think of might exist in porn. i was talking ethically, morally, do people think it is right for such material to exist. i dont agree with this system and most of what it does allow, but i was using that example rhetorically to figure out how people feel about stuff like that. so, in my view, simulation is just as wrong or almost so as the real thing
next, racists and fascists are in fact aroused by their violence. havent you ever seen the parties and group picnics that were done around a lynching in the photographs? and the way the bodies were mutilated with glee for souvenirs? and torture in the fascist sense must be made to be pleasurable to its users in order for it to work. theres a lot of good research out there analyzing what it has taken for people to become career torturers or to make torture a commone element of everyday life in fascistic or brutal periods of recent history. rape is a form of torture
also, one of the most unsettling things about the discussion of rape within this thread is the total misrepresentation of it, which i am as much to blame for as others i suppose. rape is about power, not titillation. so are the acts of humiliation found in 'nonviolent' porn mentioned earlier. you dont have to be the one doing it to get off on the power of it- its torture and humiliation as a spectator sport.
next, who the hell is coming up with these stats about reduced rape rates in the usa since 1979? besides the fact that it is the least-likely-to-be-reported violent crimes, which means its impossible to know the truth and thus cant successfully be argued on either side (claims of increase or decrease) ive never seen laudable sources indicating a drop in rape since 1979.
how about this source frome the disaster center which shows that reported rape rate since 1979 were actually highest in the early-mid-1990s, and that the rate is about the same in the most recent year as it was in 1979? and the fact that the usa government alone assumes that only 39% of rapes are reported, when in fact that is probably much lower. this would seem to directly contradict your pretty outrageous claim:
and i have to say also, that any claim that any reduction in rape and sexual violence is due to violent porn is absolutely out of this world. there are huge feminist organizations and movements that have toiled endlessly for decades to fight crimes against women, including rape and the illegalization of abortion, and tons of other reasons rape or sexual violence might go down. dont thank the porn industry for that. what an incredible claim
frankly, some of these excuses from people in this thread i think help promote a rape culture within the activist community. i dont blame any of you for consuming porn, but i do blame you for being so desparately defensive of pornography. honestly, attacking porn doesnt even take self-criticism for a user, so just give up on defending it
firstly, i wasnt talking about whether simulated child porn exists in the west. i generally assume that any bizarre fetish you can think of might exist in porn. i was talking ethically, morally, do people think it is right for such material to exist. i dont agree with this system and most of what it does allow, but i was using that example rhetorically to figure out how people feel about stuff like that. so, in my view, simulation is just as wrong or almost so as the real thing
next, racists and fascists are in fact aroused by their violence. havent you ever seen the parties and group picnics that were done around a lynching in the photographs? and the way the bodies were mutilated with glee for souvenirs? and torture in the fascist sense must be made to be pleasurable to its users in order for it to work. theres a lot of good research out there analyzing what it has taken for people to become career torturers or to make torture a commone element of everyday life in fascistic or brutal periods of recent history. rape is a form of torture
also, one of the most unsettling things about the discussion of rape within this thread is the total misrepresentation of it, which i am as much to blame for as others i suppose. rape is about power, not titillation. so are the acts of humiliation found in 'nonviolent' porn mentioned earlier. you dont have to be the one doing it to get off on the power of it- its torture and humiliation as a spectator sport.
next, who the hell is coming up with these stats about reduced rape rates in the usa since 1979? besides the fact that it is the least-likely-to-be-reported violent crimes, which means its impossible to know the truth and thus cant successfully be argued on either side (claims of increase or decrease) ive never seen laudable sources indicating a drop in rape since 1979.
how about this source frome the disaster center which shows that reported rape rate since 1979 were actually highest in the early-mid-1990s, and that the rate is about the same in the most recent year as it was in 1979? and the fact that the usa government alone assumes that only 39% of rapes are reported, when in fact that is probably much lower. this would seem to directly contradict your pretty outrageous claim:
and i have to say also, that any claim that any reduction in rape and sexual violence is due to violent porn is absolutely out of this world. there are huge feminist organizations and movements that have toiled endlessly for decades to fight crimes against women, including rape and the illegalization of abortion, and tons of other reasons rape or sexual violence might go down. dont thank the porn industry for that. what an incredible claim
frankly, some of these excuses from people in this thread i think help promote a rape culture within the activist community. i dont blame any of you for consuming porn, but i do blame you for being so desparately defensive of pornography. honestly, attacking porn doesnt even take self-criticism for a user, so just give up on defending it
How so?
Actual child porn requires that a child be sexually abused for its production. Simulated child porn is, by definition, the product of adults and adults alone. Any government censorship of what individuals can consentually do is by its nature coercive interference and cannot be supported.
That you would trust the bourgeois state to determine what is and what is not "appropriate" for personal consumption is frankly quite disturbing.
There's a difference between celebrating past deeds and sexual arousal and to equate the two is
I'm sure that for some racists, it's pure sadism that is driving them. But for most is an honet "belief" in their "cause". As such, the racist acts that they commit are in the service of their "war" and any celebration or tokening afterwards is "feasting on victory".
That's why, incidently, you don't see an enormous market for "racist porn"; that is fake videos of racial minorities being murdered/tortured/etc... Most racists simply do not want to view that kind of imagery.
For those who fantasize about rape, however, (and again, we're talking about 36% of women and 24% of men here) are aroused solely by the imagery.
It's the same as how someone with a shoe fetish is aroused by shoes or how someone with a schoolgirl fetish is aroused when their partner dresses up as one.
These people are still human however and their fantasies do not "controll" them. So just like how the aforementioned schoolgirl fetisher is not going to go out and comit statuatory rape, neither is a man with a rape fantasy nescessarily going to go out and commit it.
He may play at it with a willing partner, of course; but that's entirely his and her own business.
I don't know about your personal sexual history, but I think it's fairly a good bet to say that you have some sexual fantasy that you've never acted upon. It doesn't have to be "dark" or "evil", but there's probably something that you've not managed to actually act out.
Now tell me, if acting out that fantasy meant hurting another person, would you? Even if the fantasy aroused you, would you be able to force it onto someone else?
If not, why do you assume that you are so much better than anyone else? Why do you assume that they are so much less able to control their fantasies? It's abject paternalism to say that people who fantasize about one thing or another are by nature "evil" or "deranged" and must be prevented from masturbating to it.
Look, I agree that porn in which women are actually harmed should be prevented. So-called "gonzo" porn and the likes are often really abusive. But when it comes to rape porn, to acted out porn, banning that kind of harmless material is pure censorship and cannot be supported by anyone in the progressive left.
Actually, it's about both.
Anything involving sex or sexuality is ultimately about arousal and "titilation". When it comes to power fetishes (rape fantasies, BDSM, etc...) it's merely the usage of power in ones sexuality.
So women who fantasies about being raped are not only imagining the power dynamic, but the application of that power dynamic in sex. And obviously the same goes for men.
Rape porn therefore, like all porn, is designed to meet this sexual desire for sexualized power relatioships.
And just as those who enjoy bondage films are not driven to re-enact what they see, neither are those who enjoy rape porn nescessarily going to go out and commit rape.
And, indeed, all of the available evidence suggests that despite a general increase in access to this kind of material, men are no more less likely to rape now than they were a half-century ago.
In fact, they're four times less likely.
The United States Justice Department
That source fails to take into account population growth. Of course there are more rapes now than when the US had a population below 150,000. What matters though is that the per capita rate dropped significantly, despite a massive increase in access to pornography.
Well, the evidence would appear to indicate otherwise.
Yes, the significant drop in rape does not indicate what the cause is. But it does demonstrate pretty substantially that access to porn is not a significant cause of rape. As otherwise, rape should have balooned in the early ninetees with the advent of the internet. Instead, the 1990s show one the biggest drops in rapes in US history!
Like it or not, your theory is disproven by the evidence. It would appear that human beings are simply not so easily forced into behaviours. It seems that it takes a little more than watching movies to make us into criminals.
And, again, remember that rape fantasies have by all indications alwyas been here. Porn didn't "create" this "market". Accordingly, if having the fantasy were enough to make one carry it out, 24% of men would be committing rape regardless of what they watched on TV.
In reality, of course, those who commit rape are ovwehelmingly the same people who commit other violent crimes; "porn" has absolutely nothing to do with it.
I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do, so I leave it up to you...
How so?
Actual child porn requires that a child be sexually abused for its production. Simulated child porn is, by definition, the product of adults and adults alone. Any government censorship of what individuals can consentually do is by its nature coercive interference and cannot be supported.
That you would trust the bourgeois state to determine what is and what is not "appropriate" for personal consumption is frankly quite disturbing.
There's a difference between celebrating past deeds and sexual arousal and to equate the two is
I'm sure that for some racists, it's pure sadism that is driving them. But for most is an honet "belief" in their "cause". As such, the racist acts that they commit are in the service of their "war" and any celebration or tokening afterwards is "feasting on victory".
That's why, incidently, you don't see an enormous market for "racist porn"; that is fake videos of racial minorities being murdered/tortured/etc... Most racists simply do not want to view that kind of imagery.
For those who fantasize about rape, however, (and again, we're talking about 36% of women and 24% of men here) are aroused solely by the imagery.
It's the same as how someone with a shoe fetish is aroused by shoes or how someone with a schoolgirl fetish is aroused when their partner dresses up as one.
These people are still human however and their fantasies do not "controll" them. So just like how the aforementioned schoolgirl fetisher is not going to go out and comit statuatory rape, neither is a man with a rape fantasy nescessarily going to go out and commit it.
He may play at it with a willing partner, of course; but that's entirely his and her own business.
I don't know about your personal sexual history, but I think it's fairly a good bet to say that you have some sexual fantasy that you've never acted upon. It doesn't have to be "dark" or "evil", but there's probably something that you've not managed to actually act out.
Now tell me, if acting out that fantasy meant hurting another person, would you? Even if the fantasy aroused you, would you be able to force it onto someone else?
If not, why do you assume that you are so much better than anyone else? Why do you assume that they are so much less able to control their fantasies? It's abject paternalism to say that people who fantasize about one thing or another are by nature "evil" or "deranged" and must be prevented from masturbating to it.
Look, I agree that porn in which women are actually harmed should be prevented. So-called "gonzo" porn and the likes are often really abusive. But when it comes to rape porn, to acted out porn, banning that kind of harmless material is pure censorship and cannot be supported by anyone in the progressive left.
Actually, it's about both.
Anything involving sex or sexuality is ultimately about arousal and "titilation". When it comes to power fetishes (rape fantasies, BDSM, etc...) it's merely the usage of power in ones sexuality.
So women who fantasies about being raped are not only imagining the power dynamic, but the application of that power dynamic in sex. And obviously the same goes for men.
Rape porn therefore, like all porn, is designed to meet this sexual desire for sexualized power relatioships.
And just as those who enjoy bondage films are not driven to re-enact what they see, neither are those who enjoy rape porn nescessarily going to go out and commit rape.
And, indeed, all of the available evidence suggests that despite a general increase in access to this kind of material, men are no more less likely to rape now than they were a half-century ago.
In fact, they're four times less likely.
The United States Justice Department
That source fails to take into account population growth. Of course there are more rapes now than when the US had a population below 150,000. What matters though is that the per capita rate dropped significantly, despite a massive increase in access to pornography.
Well, the evidence would appear to indicate otherwise.
Yes, the significant drop in rape does not indicate what the cause is. But it does demonstrate pretty substantially that access to porn is not a significant cause of rape. As otherwise, rape should have balooned in the early ninetees with the advent of the internet. Instead, the 1990s show one the biggest drops in rapes in US history!
Like it or not, your theory is disproven by the evidence. It would appear that human beings are simply not so easily forced into behaviours. It seems that it takes a little more than watching movies to make us into criminals.
And, again, remember that rape fantasies have by all indications alwyas been here. Porn didn't "create" this "market". Accordingly, if having the fantasy were enough to make one carry it out, 24% of men would be committing rape regardless of what they watched on TV.
In reality, of course, those who commit rape are ovwehelmingly the same people who commit other violent crimes; "porn" has absolutely nothing to do with it.
I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do, so I leave it up to you...
How so?
Actual child porn requires that a child be sexually abused for its production. Simulated child porn is, by definition, the product of adults and adults alone. Any government censorship of what individuals can consentually do is by its nature coercive interference and cannot be supported.
That you would trust the bourgeois state to determine what is and what is not "appropriate" for personal consumption is frankly quite disturbing.
There's a difference between celebrating past deeds and sexual arousal and to equate the two is
I'm sure that for some racists, it's pure sadism that is driving them. But for most is an honet "belief" in their "cause". As such, the racist acts that they commit are in the service of their "war" and any celebration or tokening afterwards is "feasting on victory".
That's why, incidently, you don't see an enormous market for "racist porn"; that is fake videos of racial minorities being murdered/tortured/etc... Most racists simply do not want to view that kind of imagery.
For those who fantasize about rape, however, (and again, we're talking about 36% of women and 24% of men here) are aroused solely by the imagery.
It's the same as how someone with a shoe fetish is aroused by shoes or how someone with a schoolgirl fetish is aroused when their partner dresses up as one.
These people are still human however and their fantasies do not "controll" them. So just like how the aforementioned schoolgirl fetisher is not going to go out and comit statuatory rape, neither is a man with a rape fantasy nescessarily going to go out and commit it.
He may play at it with a willing partner, of course; but that's entirely his and her own business.
I don't know about your personal sexual history, but I think it's fairly a good bet to say that you have some sexual fantasy that you've never acted upon. It doesn't have to be "dark" or "evil", but there's probably something that you've not managed to actually act out.
Now tell me, if acting out that fantasy meant hurting another person, would you? Even if the fantasy aroused you, would you be able to force it onto someone else?
If not, why do you assume that you are so much better than anyone else? Why do you assume that they are so much less able to control their fantasies? It's abject paternalism to say that people who fantasize about one thing or another are by nature "evil" or "deranged" and must be prevented from masturbating to it.
Look, I agree that porn in which women are actually harmed should be prevented. So-called "gonzo" porn and the likes are often really abusive. But when it comes to rape porn, to acted out porn, banning that kind of harmless material is pure censorship and cannot be supported by anyone in the progressive left.
Actually, it's about both.
Anything involving sex or sexuality is ultimately about arousal and "titilation". When it comes to power fetishes (rape fantasies, BDSM, etc...) it's merely the usage of power in ones sexuality.
So women who fantasies about being raped are not only imagining the power dynamic, but the application of that power dynamic in sex. And obviously the same goes for men.
Rape porn therefore, like all porn, is designed to meet this sexual desire for sexualized power relatioships.
And just as those who enjoy bondage films are not driven to re-enact what they see, neither are those who enjoy rape porn nescessarily going to go out and commit rape.
And, indeed, all of the available evidence suggests that despite a general increase in access to this kind of material, men are no more less likely to rape now than they were a half-century ago.
In fact, they're four times less likely.
The United States Justice Department
That source fails to take into account population growth. Of course there are more rapes now than when the US had a population below 150,000. What matters though is that the per capita rate dropped significantly, despite a massive increase in access to pornography.
Well, the evidence would appear to indicate otherwise.
Yes, the significant drop in rape does not indicate what the cause is. But it does demonstrate pretty substantially that access to porn is not a significant cause of rape. As otherwise, rape should have balooned in the early ninetees with the advent of the internet. Instead, the 1990s show one the biggest drops in rapes in US history!
Like it or not, your theory is disproven by the evidence. It would appear that human beings are simply not so easily forced into behaviours. It seems that it takes a little more than watching movies to make us into criminals.
And, again, remember that rape fantasies have by all indications alwyas been here. Porn didn't "create" this "market". Accordingly, if having the fantasy were enough to make one carry it out, 24% of men would be committing rape regardless of what they watched on TV.
In reality, of course, those who commit rape are ovwehelmingly the same people who commit other violent crimes; "porn" has absolutely nothing to do with it.
I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do, so I leave it up to you...
that source was about the rate, not the overall, which is exactly what youre talking about and does take into account population growth. did you look at the site? it had a chart about the rate, and that is per capita.
that source was about the rate, not the overall, which is exactly what youre talking about and does take into account population growth. did you look at the site? it had a chart about the rate, and that is per capita.
that source was about the rate, not the overall, which is exactly what youre talking about and does take into account population growth. did you look at the site? it had a chart about the rate, and that is per capita.
Yes, it appears that there is a second box with per capita data. I apologize for my error, it seems I missed it when I looked before.
But since that site does not document its sources or indicate to any degree where it is getting those numbers from, I really can't take it as a more credible source than the Washington Times which, again, reports on a recent study that rape rates have significantly droped.
And in any case, my other points on this issue still stand. There is simply no convincing evidence that porn leads to rape or sexual assualt, nor that censorships of rape porn will reduce the prevalence of rape fantasy which is, again, remarkably common in both men and women.
I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do, so I leave it up to you...
Yes, it appears that there is a second box with per capita data. I apologize for my error, it seems I missed it when I looked before.
But since that site does not document its sources or indicate to any degree where it is getting those numbers from, I really can't take it as a more credible source than the Washington Times which, again, reports on a recent study that rape rates have significantly droped.
And in any case, my other points on this issue still stand. There is simply no convincing evidence that porn leads to rape or sexual assualt, nor that censorships of rape porn will reduce the prevalence of rape fantasy which is, again, remarkably common in both men and women.
I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do, so I leave it up to you...
Yes, it appears that there is a second box with per capita data. I apologize for my error, it seems I missed it when I looked before.
But since that site does not document its sources or indicate to any degree where it is getting those numbers from, I really can't take it as a more credible source than the Washington Times which, again, reports on a recent study that rape rates have significantly droped.
And in any case, my other points on this issue still stand. There is simply no convincing evidence that porn leads to rape or sexual assualt, nor that censorships of rape porn will reduce the prevalence of rape fantasy which is, again, remarkably common in both men and women.
I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do, so I leave it up to you...
So in your eyes I'm a mass murderer? Being an avid computer gamer, I've killed thousands of simulated humans. I wonder why I haven't been arrested since I'm such a huge danger to society
The Human Progress Group
Does it follow that I reject all authority? Perish the thought. In the matter of boots, I defer to the authority of the boot-maker - Mikhail Bakunin
Workers of the world unite; you have nothing to lose but your chains - Karl Marx
Pollution is nothing but the resources we are not harvesting. We allow them to disperse because we've been ignorant of their value - R. Buckminster Fuller
The important thing is not to be human but to be humane - Eliezer S. Yudkowsky
Check out my speculative fiction project: NOVA MUNDI
Because you use an IP blocker.Originally posted by NoXion@Jun 24 2006, 05:03 PM
So in your eyes I'm a mass murderer? Being an avid computer gamer, I've killed thousands of simulated humans. I wonder why I haven't been arrested since I'm such a huge danger to society
The internets are our Woodstock.
I'm new here and this is a very long thread but what are we discussing here? Is a centerfold in Playboy in any way comparable to the depiction of child rape? I don't think so. Porn is a category that we didn't invent but seem to accept. I don't think so-called 'soft porn' (ie. the stuff we run across in every high street and lots of movies) is pornographic at all. It's naked people maybe pretending to have sex - I think we've all done that (pretended to have sex!
