Does porn cause harm?

[juliod]

It's been a long time since I've debated pornography. But it used to be a staple during my early internet days.

Some posters here occasionally refer to porn as it it were understood to be a Bad Thing. So I think we should debate the point.

My claim is that porn has been studied extensively since the 70's, and the harm attributable to porn is still zero.

DanZ

[juliod]

like anything pleasurable (which porn is supposed to be pleasurable to watch/see on the sexual level) it can become addictive.

Ouch!

This is one of the perversions that christianity has foisted on our society: that anything "good" must really be "bad".

But even in that context, this is still a false claim. Only addictive things are addictive. It is possible for someone with an obsession/compulsion disorder to be "addicted" to porn, but that is a problem with their brains, not with porn. Some people with those disorders obsessively confirm that their doors are locked. Locks do not thereby cause harm.

Secondly, porn can lead to a warped mindset.

This has never been shown to be true, that porn can influence one's "mindset".

But if it could, what is the message of porn? That "sex is good". I would suggest the alternative, that "sex is bad", is the warped view.

porn can lead to ideas like the objectification of women (or men even)

Years ago, people used to talk a lot about "objectification". But no one ever clearly defined what was meant by that, or ever showed that it was harmful, or even detectable in any way.

That doesn't mean that I think that everyone should be forced to look at it my way.

An attitude which does you credit.

DanZ

[Cephus]

First of all, like anything pleasurable (which porn is supposed to be pleasurable to watch/see on the sexual level) it can become addictive. Addiction can lead to social reclusion, among other things, and hurt the addict in general in all the classic ways that addiction has been recorded to do so.

Ah yes, the classic Christian claim: anything that you like must be bad for you! Of course, the biggest addiction we see in the world today is... wait for it... RELIGION!

Secondly, porn can lead to a warped mindset. I realize this is mostly only in people with very easily molded or sensitive minds.

Ah, you mean those same people who tend to fall for religion, right?

I disapprove of porn of all kinds.

Then don't look at it. See, sometimes the solutions are easy.

I find it offensive.

I find Christianity offensive, doesn't mean I care if someone believes in it.

[veerar]

It causes enormous harm,morally.A morally weak person is a good candidate for victimisation,more so,if the subject belongs to the weaker sex.
In this context,I would like to see Cyber Sex,totally banned.
Porn is the major cause of drugs,murders and other criminal activities,apart from,pimping,prostitution , human traffikking etc.
PORN IS ONE OF THE MOST DANGEROUS THINGS AND PORNOGRAPHY NEEDS TO BE BANNED.

[Cephus]

It causes enormous harm,morally.A morally weak person is a good candidate for victimisation,more so,if the subject belongs to the weaker sex.
In this context,I would like to see Cyber Sex,totally banned.
Porn is the major cause of drugs,murders and other criminal activities,apart from,pimping,prostitution , human traffikking etc.
PORN IS ONE OF THE MOST DANGEROUS THINGS AND PORNOGRAPHY NEEDS TO BE BANNED.

My, it's nice to see how you actually defended any of that with evidence, you know?

Try again.

[veerar]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornography_addiction
http://www.rense.com/general73/porn.htm
My post is self-evident.
I will give you one example.This has actually taken place.One cine actress,who was good-looking,suddenly disappeared from the scene,She returned after many years fat and flabby.No one went near her.She did not have friends.Because she lost her beauty, she isolated herslef,did not marry,and became a mental wreck.She called herself an interior decorator,because she was not offered roles.She was shunned.And finally,she committed suicide,at a very young age.
I am sorry, to have responded to this thread.This is my last post in this thread.Please do not ask for more evidence.
I am afraid,I will lose tokens,posting on this dirty subject,when there are so many good ones to respond to.My only aim was to remind,people of the pitfalls of this deadly disease and addition.
Kindly do not be offended.

[Cephus]

My post is self-evident.

The only thing self-evident is that you are posting your opinion, nothing more. While you are entitled to your opinion, you cannot present it as fact without supporting it.

I am sorry, to have responded to this thread.This is my last post in this thread.Please do not ask for more evidence.

Because you have none, we know. Hopefully you'll be more successful in other threads because you've completely screwed up in this one.

[ChooseAndAct]

I would have to argue that porn is no more or less harmful than anything else in the world. CAN porn cause harm? Sure so can a puppy it doesn't make it evil.

I was exposed to pornography when I was 11 years old (and it did not come from the internet). I will admit that this is a rather young age. Also I would agree that keeping porn out of the hand of 11 year olds is a probably a good thing. However my 11 year old mind was not warped. I did not start viewing women as objects or any of the other problems ascribed to viewing pornography. I would say that more than 50% of my peers were exposed to porn by the time they were 13 and yet they all grew up to be healthy individuals. So any "harm" that exposure to porn caused us was minimal at best.

[George00]

That said, I think there's too much emphasis on it in the US, mostly because it's a very sexually repressed culture.

Yes we are sexually repressed; maybe even neurotic.

Are you guys sure that repressed is the right word for what you are referring to? While I have heard people repeat that phrase constantly, what you are really talking about seems to be sexual suppression. I believe most people are consciously aware of their sexual urges, even if devoutly religious. Here are a few online definitions....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_repression

Psychological repression, or simply repression, is the psychological act of excluding desires and impulses (wishes, fantasies or feelings) from one's consciousness and attempting to hold or subdue them in the subconscious. Since the popularization of Sigmund Freud's work in psychoanalysis, repression is popularly known to be a common defense mechanism.

Repression is considered unconscious and can often be detrimental. It may be contrasted with suppression, which is entirely conscious and thus can be managed. Because repression is unconscious, it manifests itself through a symptom or series of symptoms, sometimes called the "return of the repressed." A repressed sexual desire, for example, might re-surface in the form of a nervous cough or a slip of the tongue. In this way, although the subject is not conscious of the desire and so cannot speak it out loud, the subject's body can still articulate the forbidden desire through the symptom.

A person can suppress the impulse to "choke the life out of some idiot who desperately needs it" for higher reasons, such as sociability, or more mundane reasons, like keeping a job - especially if it's a co-worker or boss being considered for the assault. The desire is sometimes conscious, but is thwarted by the exercise of willpower due to a rational decision to avoid the action. However, there are an enormous amount of ideas and associations triggered by our desires that do remain unconscious.

And...
http://www.alleydog.com/glossary/defini ... uppression

Suppression: Suppression is similar to repression, but there are some subtle differences. In repression the person “unconsciously” pushes painful or difficult memories, actions, etc. out of consciousness. However, suppression is a “conscious” exclusion (or "pushing" down) of these painful memories, thoughts, etc. In this way, we control impulses consciously as opposed to unconsciously.

[Cephus]

Are you guys sure that repressed is the right word for what you are referring to? While I have heard people repeat that phrase constantly, what you are really talking about seems to be sexual suppression. I believe most people are consciously aware of their sexual urges, even if devoutly religious.

Yes, it's the right word. In the US, sexual feelings and expression are taught, usually by the mainstream religions, as being bad and evil and something to be ashamed of. Anyone who openly displays sexual ideas is thought of as cheap and slutty and low class. I think most people recognize that they have sexual urges, they are just taught by the society that it's wrong and they should be ashamed of themselves for having them, except within very narrowly defined situations.

[Enrique]

Lust for anyone other than your husband or wife is sin according to Jesus.

I don't think the son of god had such a close mind. We should put his teachings in context and use our reason. To the people of that age, that only used to stroll around the earth and had poor education you can't explain moral, ethics and reason in a couple of days. Most of them can be compared to kids. They couldn't catch the reasons, so you just tell'em not to do that.
I think we have enough resources today (statistics, psicology) to gain a true understanding of the situation instead of saying that a book of 2000 hundreds years age with no reasons have the last word