Iceland tries to ban porn and prostitution - will it work?

Post Reply New Topic

No, you explain what you mean

Some aspects or morality are non negotiable, or should be

Is this where you start defending paedophillia as a lifestyle choice?

I'm always highly suspicious of anyone who wants to advocate redefining morality to cater for
peoples' specific perversions

Moral relatavism is the very thing that's destroying society - there literally are no moral standards
any more and it's only going to get much worse

All the selfish idiots w*king over their hardcore porn won't be bothered until it impacts on their lives directly though

I say good on Iceland for taking a stand against it all

You performed an Ad Hominem fallacy by attacking my (alleged) preferences for pornography rather than addressing the scientific evidence I posted on the relationship between pornography and sexual violence.

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

There is no logical connection between (1) alleged preference of an individual for pornography and (2) evidence on the relationship between pornography and sexual violence. Furthermore, your claim about (1) has no empirical support, as you just made that up to support your personal view.

In plain English: Your line of argument is crap.

Ofcourse it's not going to work.
Porn and prostitution will go underground when it's banned which means that hardened criminals will take control of the porn industry and of prostitution because they dive into anything that is illegal. That will lead to even more undesirable and awful situations for prostitutes and people who work in the porn industry.

Prostitution has probably been around from the moment we evolved into homo sapiens. It is an illusion that it is ever going to be eradicated. Besides, if a prostitute is not forced to work in prostitution and if she is not the victim of human trafficing, if she does it out of her own free wil,l I don't see what the problem is.

Last edited by pokerface on 20 Apr 2013, 11:48 am, edited 3 times in total.

And how do you explain what Vincent Tabac did then?

and this?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ences.html

"Children as young as five are being reported to the police over sex offences, a charity warned last night.

The NSPCC blamed the shocking statistics on the growing ease of access to online pornography that ‘warps’ young people’s minds.

More than 5,000 formal investigations have been launched over the past three years into under-18s accused of crimes including rape and sexual assault, according to statistics obtained by the charity.

It blamed the rise on hardcore porn that is readily available on the internet, warping youngsters’ ideas about sex and relationships.

The NSPCC’s findings reveal that the number of sex offences allegedly committed by under-18s has gone up 38 per cent from 1,432 in 2009/10 to 1,978 in 2011/12."

"Only last week, a 15-year-old boy was convicted of raping a 14-year-old girl after becoming obsessed with online porn. The girl was bound, gagged, beaten up and raped as he tried to re-enact sadistic scenes he had viewed on the internet.

Her father demanded ministers take action to protect children from adult material online, particularly the ‘extreme violent nature’ of some easily accessible sites."


http://www.contentwatch.com/learn_center/article/107

"Porn Use and Sex Crimes

Rory Reid

Intuitively, one would think that pornography contributes to the high rate of sex crimes being committed in society today. It is not uncommon to discover sex offenders in possession of large collections of pornography. Furthermore, if we were not influenced by what we see, why would advertisement companies spend millions of dollars creating the perfect ad or commercial to catch our eye? Despite these arguments, some suggest that sex offenders seek pornography to feed or fuel their pre-existing deviant sexual fantasies. They contend that pornography provides validation for unhealthy (sometimes referred to as "alternative") views on sexuality and deny that the material itself creates those perceptions. There have been several research studies to substantiate these positions. Some producers of sexually explicit material are quick to site these studies as a defense for accusations or allegations made against their industry. Regardless of these positions, newspaper columnist James Kilpatrick writes: "Common sense is a better guide than laboratory experiments; and common sense tells us pornography is bound to contribute to sexual crime. . . . It seems ludicrous to argue 'bad' books do not promote bad behavior" (Kilpatrick, 1975).

As part of my experience working with incarcerated sex offenders, I listened to countless disclosures of inmates describing their heinous sexual assaults on victims. During these therapy sessions, it is not uncommon to hear an inmate indicate that part of the reason for their sexual deviance was due to consumption of pornography which influenced the way they behaved. This response from a prisoner in a sex offender treatment program is unacceptable because such disclosures attempt to minimize responsibility for behavior by shifting the blame. If someone can successfully avoid or reduce the amount of blame they must accept for their actions, then the accountability for their behavior is also reduced. This tactic ultimately attempts to manipulate the consequences one must suffer for their own wrongdoings.

As an illustration, one inmate attempted to convince a group of his peers that he had never considered molesting his child until he saw similar sex acts normalized in child pornography. Although this may be true, the focus must remain on the individual and his behavior, not the pornography. Part of his behavior resulted from his distorted interpretation of what he saw depicted in the child pornography. Why was he not repulsed by these images when initially exposed? Are we to believe he stumbled across these pictures by accident on the Internet? In his case, there appeared to be some pre-existing pathology and deviant arousal that drew him to these images while someone else would have been mortified and avoided exposure to the same material.

One research study analyzed the various arguments and data presented by other studies that contended the lack of reliable connections between pornography and aggressive sexual behavior. The study concluded that, in fact, there was existence of reliable associations between frequent pornography use and sexually aggressive behaviors, particularly for violent pornography and/or for men at high risk for sexual aggression (Malamuth, Neil et. al., 2000).

Another study collected from 100 survivors at a rape crisis center discovered that 28% of respondents reported that their abuser used pornography and that for 12% of the women, pornography was imitated during the abusive incident (Bergen, Raquel Kennedy, 2000).

In spite of these findings, others persist in their contention that there is little correlation between pornography use and causation of sexual deviant behavior. In part, they cite as evidence that, although many sex offenders do use pornography, there are just as many others who consume pornography who do not engage in sex crimes.

Regardless of your position, my experience indicates the majority of sex offenders have pornography consumption as an associated behavior. It is imperative that these individuals maintain abstinence from pornography as part of their effort to minimize possible risk factors for re-offending. But what about everyone else?

Consider the fraudulent message pornography teaches about healthy human intimacy. It portrays both women and men as objects with insatiable sexual appetites. Sexual relations with multiple partners are presented as normal and healthy, while monogamous relationships are depicted as cumbersome and undesirable. Distorted views of perverted sex acts are presented as exciting and acceptable, and in many instances, the viewer is exposed to otherwise unimaginable ideas about sexuality that they themselves would never have considered. These same acts are normalized by desensitizing the viewer after numerous exposures to the material. Other aspects of sexual intimacy, such as communication and tender affection, are usually omitted from pornography while consequences of promiscuous sexual behavior such as STDs and unwanted pregnancies are minimized. Surely, these ideas cannot be considered healthy. And yet, that is what many producers of pornography would have us believe.

I believe it is safe to say that people who consume pornography, specifically violent pornography, place themselves at risk of engaging in inappropriate and unhealthy behaviors. Just as alcohol impairs one's perception of reality, likewise, pornography distorts a healthy view of human sexual intimacy. Of course, in saying this, I risk criticism from those who will argue that healthy sexual intimacy in itself is a subjective matter and that I should not impose my opinions about healthy intimacy on them. I wish these same individuals could sit in my chair as I listen to some of their spouses cry bitter tears of resentment about the various sex acts they have been subjected to in the name of their spouse's definition of healthy intimacy. These clients often report feeling manipulated and coerced into participating in sexual behavior that their spouse wanted, but they did not. These are, perhaps, some of the more subtle sex crimes that will never see prosecution, a courtroom, or an indictment. These crimes are emotionally and physically abusive but often fall on deaf ears because they happen behind bedroom doors in the context of marriage relationships.

As we consider the contribution that pornography makes in the high number of sex crimes in our society today, let us not overlook the less obvious sex crimes that are committed by individuals whose views about sexual intimacy are distorted by pornography and who, in turn, seek to have their loved ones indulge in those same unhealthy views of sex. These relationships can sometimes be more damaging than the violent rape cases perpetuated by a complete stranger. At least in the case of a rape, an individual might easier come to acknowledge that they are not to be blamed for the sex crime, although I am not suggesting this is an easy process either. In the context of the committed relationships where the less obvious sex crimes occur, an individual is often left wondering if their view of sexual intimacy was too conservative or prudish. They blame themselves for going along with what they thought was an attempt to please their spouse. Unfortunately, sometimes when they confide in those whom they trust, they are told to dress more sexy so their spouse doesn't turn to pornography, as if they are to blame for their spouse's behavior. One client even reported she would have preferred a one-time traumatic experience with sex from a stranger than have over ten years of being subjected to perverted sex from her spouse who was being influenced by pornography.

The role of pornography in sex crimes-both subtle and not so subtle-is one that deserves more than dialogue and discussion. Community efforts to educate and create an awareness of these issues are certainly steps in the right direction. Yet more must be done to reduce the exposure of those we love to pornography and to keep them from the heartbreak and danger of unhealthy sexual intimacy. Such tragedies are truly crimes that can best be avoided by taking preventative measures in the home and in our communities.

Bergen, Raquel Kennedy, Violence and Victims. 2000 Vol 15 (3): 227-234)

Kilpatrick, James as quoted in Donnerstein, Edward; Linz, Daniel: Penrod, Steven; 1987: The Question of Pornography: Research Findings and Policy Implications. New York: Free Press.

Malamuth, Neil M; Addison, Tamara; Koss, Mary; Pornography and sexual aggression: Are there reliable effects and can we understand them? Annual Review of Sex Research, 2000: Vol. 11: 26-91"

Last edited by nessa238 on 20 Apr 2013, 12:01 pm, edited 3 times in total.

No one's said all porn would be banned, just the violent degrading stuff

I'm not talking about prostitution, just the porn

By looking at the specific case of the Joanna Yeates murder, and not by making sweeping generalizations that are discredited by scientific research...

His use of porn impacted on that killing - he enjoyed looking at porn of women being choked both before and after he'd murdered her

I really have no time for people who try to defend the indefensible

Tell me, what kind of porn do you watch then?

I'd love to take a look at your hard drive is all I can say

Your first link is a *news* article, not a scientific study.


Your second link is to a company which sells Internet protection solutions (including Net Nanny). They have an economic interest in presenting pornography in the worst possible light...

Once again, you cast:



And my response is:

No one's impressed with your silly pictures except you

I think a national charity that deals with child abuse ie the NSPCC is going to have a better idea of what's actually happening than you and your statistics

I notice you don't want to tell us all what kind of porn you like to watch so I think we'll all form our own conclusions from that...

The sort of societies that ban porn, or that ban materials that they consider to be 'triggers', tend to be very intolerant societies fuelled by religion.

Lots of people (including some feminist killjoy groups) think that all porn is harmful and that it should all be banned because it's all 'immoral', and all the women who take part in it are sluts who deserve whatever bad things happen to them. How dare they immodestly use their body for their own pleasure and happiness?

Should we ban the book Catcher in the Rye? I'm quite serious about this. If we're going to ban every last thing that has acted (or could act) as a trigger to someone or something, we're going to end up living in a very repressed, intolerant and illiberal society. Perhaps a Saudi-style society would be preferable for you?

I would wager that your own prudishness is the problem here.

I have no interest whatsoever in watching someone sexually enjoying getting the crap beaten out of them. But as long as they are the ones who want to do this, and they are not being coerced into doing it, it's none of my business.

By that yardstick, we'd end up without a modern-day society.

Just you think of all the things that can kill people, or that can be used to kill or harm people.

I think science is going to have a better idea of what's actually happening than your crap.




Damn... You *really* like this spell, don't you?

Er I'll point out again (as people seem to be wilfully overlooking the fact) - it's the violent, sadistic, degrading stuff they're looking to ban, not all porn

Hypothetically, if a person who got off on watching violent/extreme porn decided to re-enact it on one of your relatives, in the same manner that Vincent Tabac did on Joanna Yates, would you still think it was ok?

How does thinking extreme porn is a bad thing make me a prude?

I'd say it demonstrates that I care about what happens in society

If you don't like watching it are you a prude too?

Why exactly don't you like watching it?

bit too nasty for you is it?

I'll tell you what

We'll set up special extreme porn viewing centres, where the people who can't live without it can go to watch it - they have to register and can only see it at these centres; then we can see exactly who they are and give them a very wide berth!

because for all the fact that people want all this freedom to watch whatever kind of porn they like, they seem to have gone awfully quiet when it comes to standing up and saying they actually like watching it

surely they're not ashamed of watching it?

I wonder why that would be....

Spell? what do you mean by that?

I'm presenting information that supports my argument

you're just posting stupid photos and saying I'm talking crap - how very mature!

let's see you post some of the benefits of porn - how do you benefit from it?

how do your female friends, girlfriend and relatives benefit from it?

let's see you defend extreme porn