Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 20, 2014, 06:48:41 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
RPGFan Community Quiz
Next Quiz Date: January 11, 2014
Subject: 999 (Nintendo DS)
For more information click HERE!
319236 Posts in 13035 Topics by 2145 Members
Latest Member: aew0
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  RPGFan Message Boards
|-+  The Rest
| |-+  General Discussions
| | |-+  Rape/Loli Ban in Japan
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] Print
Author Topic: Rape/Loli Ban in Japan  (Read 16301 times)
Redeemed
Posts: 201


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #60 on: June 16, 2009, 10:08:02 AM »

I do not agree that porn decreases your sexual urges, merely fulfills them. If I hit a punching bag shaped like a person a few times every day as a personal outlet, will that suddenly make me look at other people as punching bags I can beat whenever I want? Of course not.


I would say it definitely would make you more prone to lash out physically when put in certain situations! You're conditioning yourself to respond to stresses by punching.

Will you actually punch someone? That's of course unlikely, unless you have self-control issues. But will you think about punching someone? Well, if you're using you're punching as an outlet, I would assume you're probably thinking about specific people you would like to be punching, right? So, I would say it's the same with pornography. Are you going to go out and rape someone? Again, unlikely--save for those with self-control issues, ie. sexual offenders. But are you more likely to view women, both strangers and those you love, with respect? Look, of course immediately after you jack off to porn, you're not gonna have much steam left. That's obvious. I'm talking over the long term here--one's attitudes towards women and what sex is really all about.
Quote
You're arguing that people who view porn will look at women one way, and Hidoshi is arguing the opposite. You both are forgetting that each person's reaction to visual and aural input is vastly different. It may not affect some people, it may affect others a little, and still others may be influenced a lot. Certain people are just more easily influenced by such things.

So, you do believe that there are some people who might be "easily influenced" by these rape/loli images? Is it really worth having around then? Does it contribute that much to society that it would justify it's existence if it means some men would move on to viewing real images of abuse and/or taking part in such abuse? That seems like a hard argument to make.
« Last Edit: June 16, 2009, 10:15:58 AM by Redeemed » Logged
Ashton
Contributing Editor
Posts: 5038


Lawful Asshole

Member
*


View Profile WWW

Ignore
« Reply #61 on: June 16, 2009, 10:34:47 AM »

I would say it definitely would make you more prone to lash out physically when put in certain situations! You're conditioning yourself to respond to stresses by punching.
I disagree. Maybe some people would, but hey, like I said, everybody is different. Most people who know me will probably say I've mellowed out a lot in the past few years. Plus, if my primary reaction to any stressful situation is violence, then it'd make my job a whole lot harder.

Will you actually punch someone? That's of course unlikely, unless you have self-control issues. But will you think about punching someone? Well, if you're using you're punching as an outlet, I would assume you're probably thinking about specific people you would like to be punching, right? So, I would say it's the same with pornography. Are you going to go out and rape someone? Again, unlikely--save for those with self-control issues, ie. sexual offenders. But are you more likely to view women, both strangers and those you love, with respect? Look, of course immediately after you jack off to porn, you're not gonna have much steam left. That's obvious. I'm talking over the long term here--one's attitudes towards women and what sex is really all about.

Again, arguing that someone is going to look at women differently is completely absurd, not because it's impossible, but because, like I said, everyone processes the information differently. It has no effect on some people, and it has an effect on others. How much it affects each individual is vastly different for each individual case.

What "sex is all about" is overplayed to hell these days. Now, I may just be a freak, but it's not as important as everyone is saying it is. It's not some 'deep emotional connection' and neither is it 'a social status symbol.' It's a physiological imperative to produce offspring, nothing more. That 'deep emotional connection' was already there before the sex, or it wasn't. The only connotations given to sex is the ones that people have placed on it - which is why it's become such a hot topic in society these days when really, it shouldn't be.

So, you do believe that there are some people who might be "easily influenced" by these rape/loli images? Is it really worth having around then? Does it contribute that much to society that it would justify it's existence if it means some men would move on to viewing real images of abuse and/or taking part in such abuse? That seems like a hard argument to make.
People can be easily influenced by the media. Should we ban news outlets? People can also be easily influenced by books. Should we ban Tom Clancy novels? Like I said, it's a slippery slope. I don't argue that it's contributing anything to society, and I agree with it even less, but banning and censoring something just because people are offended is going to cause serious problems in the long run socially. Like I said earlier, how long before we start banning things just because a certain group finds it offensive?
Logged

Redeemed
Posts: 201


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #62 on: June 16, 2009, 11:46:55 AM »

I would say it definitely would make you more prone to lash out physically when put in certain situations! You're conditioning yourself to respond to stresses by punching.
I disagree. Maybe some people would, but hey, like I said, everybody is different. Most people who know me will probably say I've mellowed out a lot in the past few years. Plus, if my primary reaction to any stressful situation is violence, then it'd make my job a whole lot harder.

Will you actually punch someone? That's of course unlikely, unless you have self-control issues. But will you think about punching someone? Well, if you're using you're punching as an outlet, I would assume you're probably thinking about specific people you would like to be punching, right? So, I would say it's the same with pornography. Are you going to go out and rape someone? Again, unlikely--save for those with self-control issues, ie. sexual offenders. But are you more likely to view women, both strangers and those you love, with respect? Look, of course immediately after you jack off to porn, you're not gonna have much steam left. That's obvious. I'm talking over the long term here--one's attitudes towards women and what sex is really all about.

Again, arguing that someone is going to look at women differently is completely absurd, not because it's impossible, but because, like I said, everyone processes the information differently. It has no effect on some people, and it has an effect on others. How much it affects each individual is vastly different for each individual case.
I agree that some are more affected then others, but unless you're a sociopath, I argue it *will* affect you on some level. You don't view things in a vacuum.

Quote
What "sex is all about" is overplayed to hell these days. Now, I may just be a freak, but it's not as important as everyone is saying it is. It's not some 'deep emotional connection' and neither is it 'a social status symbol.' It's a physiological imperative to produce offspring, nothing more. That 'deep emotional connection' was already there before the sex, or it wasn't. The only connotations given to sex is the ones that people have placed on it - which is why it's become such a hot topic in society these days when really, it shouldn't be.
All I can say is, you're missing out ;)

Quote
So, you do believe that there are some people who might be "easily influenced" by these rape/loli images? Is it really worth having around then? Does it contribute that much to society that it would justify it's existence if it means some men would move on to viewing real images of abuse and/or taking part in such abuse? That seems like a hard argument to make.
People can be easily influenced by the media. Should we ban news outlets? People can also be easily influenced by books. Should we ban Tom Clancy novels? Like I said, it's a slippery slope. I don't argue that it's contributing anything to society, and I agree with it even less, but banning and censoring something just because people are offended is going to cause serious problems in the long run socially. Like I said earlier, how long before we start banning things just because a certain group finds it offensive?
Ah, the slippery slope argument. Classic. I could just as easily (falsely) argue that if we continue to allow this, then it will lead to us allowing people to view real child pornography, and then legalizing the production of it, etc., etc....
Look, people don't want it banned simply because they're "offended." The research suggests that images like these can lead to viewing or participating in real world abuse. That's why people want it banned.
Logged
AJR
Totally groovy
Posts: 611


Oh, this burning beard.

Member
*


View Profile WWW

Ignore
« Reply #63 on: June 16, 2009, 11:55:57 AM »

The idea that viewing pornography (child or otherwise) makes your sexual urges less is simply ridiculous. Please read the summary of Dr. Diana Russell's research above. Seriously though, you don't even need research to tell you this. Can you honestly say that after viewing pornography, you have less sex-related thoughts and desires? Maybe I'm a freak here, but in my experience, when I was regularly viewing pornography, I would definitely start looking at women in a different way, think about sex more often, and even be more likely to try to push the physical boundaries with my girlfriend. Even now that I'm married, the couple of times that I've failed and viewed pornography, which is terrible and harmful for one's marriage (even if my spouse didn't know), my attitude and behavior towards my wife and the way I think and interact with other women I see is changed. And I'm not even a struggling sex offender--imagine how much more it affects the attitude and behavior of someone who is!

As they say: Garbage in - garbage out!

Sorry if that was a little too much information for anyone. Just being real here :D

Meh. All very nice research, but there's a wealth of info on both sides of this. Me personally? I treat porn as cathartic. I've had a strong libido since long before I discovered pornography. I do in fact have less attention towards sex after viewing pornography and getting off. It just kinda fades away. Maybe I'm an exception, but I've found most of my friends to be the same way, and if we assume that every 1 person is largely equal in opinion to approximately 2000 others (a common equation in statistical data gathering), then the resultant number is a pretty big slice of pie.
Yeah, I was eager to justify it too when I was involved in that.
When I was truly honest with myself though, I knew it wasn't a good thing.

I don't get it. My girlfriend and I look at porn from time to time. It ain't no thing. I think that the fact that you are effected so strongly by porn says more about you than what it does anyone else.
Logged

Earth-2.net is a website where I occasionally type words about entertaining pieces of media.
Ashton
Contributing Editor
Posts: 5038


Lawful Asshole

Member
*


View Profile WWW

Ignore
« Reply #64 on: June 16, 2009, 12:00:09 PM »

I agree that some are more affected then others, but unless you're a sociopath, I argue it *will* affect you on some level. You don't view things in a vacuum.
It can have either a positive, negative, or no effect, depending on the person. And yes, there are people who can separate reality and fiction completely. As an example, if people watch an action movie, one person may not be affected at all, another may be excited from watching it but control his impulses to start firing guns at people, and another may actually start firing guns. If you ask me, the last person already had serious problems before watching the movie, but according to you the logical decision would be to remove the movie.

All I can say is, you're missing out ;)
Er... on what? Sex? Deep emotional connections? Social status symbols? Are you calling me a virgin? :(

Ah, the slippery slope argument. Classic. I could just as easily (falsely) argue that if we continue to allow this, then it will lead to us allowing people to view real child pornography, and then legalizing the production of it, etc., etc....
Look, people don't want it banned simply because they're "offended." The research suggests that images like these can lead to viewing or participating in real world abuse. That's why people want it banned.
Incorrect. The first person to want a ban was a politician who targeted the game and used it to slander the video game industry, even though it was sold by an individual seller on Amazon. These people don't care if these things can have real world effects (well, okay, they do, they care if there aren't any real world effects because then they'd have no soapbox) - these people were offended and wanted it banned immediately. In fact, I'd argue that the game gained much more fame after the uproar than it ever did before.

If these people wanted to make a difference, they'd go right after real child pornography instead of soapboxing and pointing fingers at the wrong people. These same people want GTA banned because they think it causes real world violence, which studies have not shown in any way. No causation can be proven.
« Last Edit: June 16, 2009, 12:02:47 PM by Leyviur » Logged

Angelo
Sephiroth's Girlfriend
Posts: 233


Member
*


View Profile WWW

Ignore
« Reply #65 on: June 16, 2009, 12:48:16 PM »

The suggestion that people who want stuff banned actually read scientific publications?  Classic.

No, they want shit banned because it's a slippery slope! It's a gateway drug!  I am the walrus!  Ice cream has bones!  Take your pick.
Logged

Redeemed
Posts: 201


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #66 on: June 16, 2009, 01:30:28 PM »

I agree that some are more affected then others, but unless you're a sociopath, I argue it *will* affect you on some level. You don't view things in a vacuum.
It can have either a positive, negative, or no effect, depending on the person. And yes, there are people who can separate reality and fiction completely. As an example, if people watch an action movie, one person may not be affected at all, another may be excited from watching it but control his impulses to start firing guns at people, and another may actually start firing guns. If you ask me, the last person already had serious problems before watching the movie, but according to you the logical decision would be to remove the movie.
Come on now. This is not what I'm saying. You really don't see the difference between an action movie and images depicting children as objects for sexual arousal?
Quote
All I can say is, you're missing out ;)
Er... on what? Sex? Deep emotional connections? Social status symbols? Are you calling me a virgin? :(
I'm just saying that if you only view sex as a "physiological imperative to produce offspring, nothing more," then I feel sorry for you (and your future spouse!). Hey, and if you're a virgin--there's no shame in that. It's healthier to wait until your married anyway :D
Quote
Ah, the slippery slope argument. Classic. I could just as easily (falsely) argue that if we continue to allow this, then it will lead to us allowing people to view real child pornography, and then legalizing the production of it, etc., etc....
Look, people don't want it banned simply because they're "offended." The research suggests that images like these can lead to viewing or participating in real world abuse. That's why people want it banned.
Incorrect. The first person to want a ban was a politician who targeted the game and used it to slander the video game industry, even though it was sold by an individual seller on Amazon. These people don't care if these things can have real world effects (well, okay, they do, they care if there aren't any real world effects because then they'd have no soapbox) - these people were offended and wanted it banned immediately. In fact, I'd argue that the game gained much more fame after the uproar than it ever did before.

If these people wanted to make a difference, they'd go right after real child pornography instead of soapboxing and pointing fingers at the wrong people. These same people want GTA banned because they think it causes real world violence, which studies have not shown in any way. No causation can be proven.
Really? The first person to want it banned was the politician who saw that game? There have been huge movements by Unicef, ECPAT, and many other child protection groups pushing for bans on virtual child porn like this for years and years. And of course, you must know that they can both push for bans and also go after real child pornography at the same time, right? You make it seem like this is their one cause, and they can't do anything else but focus on this. By the way, why are you lumping Unicef in with the same people who want GTA banned?  They are NOT connected!
Logged
Danakir
Posts: 106


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #67 on: June 16, 2009, 02:10:46 PM »

Personal issues should not be used to try and justify's one position, for they are by nature aberrant and do not reflect upon the whole of the human condition.

We make what we will of what we see and hear, just the same way we make our own every circumstance in our personal history. Some may break under duress where others thrive and bloom. It's a simple fact of life, that it moves in ways that are hardly predictable, there is no such thing as 'social psychology', or more precisely mass psychology. Each individual is its own headcase, so to speak.

Further, the presentation of violence as acceptable whereas sexual behavior is not is deeply endemic of our culture, but it is, let us not fool ourselves, entirely a fabrication of said cultural zeitgeist. That is, it is a symptom of a time and place, not a human imperative.

Hence, yes, it is entirely fair to compare violent content to sexual content for if sexuality is an imperative of our biological condition as mammals, then violence is even more so as living beings who are required by nature to feed upon others, and who by nature desire that which does not belong to us, etc etc.

You see, it is not sexuality per se you are refering to but a form of violence which takes the guise of sexuality.

Thus I would argue that violence is much more dangerous than any form of sexual content, since it is a more distilled and pure form of this abuse.

Sexuality in itself is, quite frankly, nothing.
« Last Edit: June 16, 2009, 02:13:50 PM by Danakir » Logged

~My melody of life, rhyming to memento mori...
Alisha
Posts: 2695


Member
*

Z0eila@hotmail.com Z0eila
View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #68 on: June 16, 2009, 08:28:12 PM »

this is my stance on porn and sex.

if you have an itch scratch it. porn is merely a backscratcher that helps you to scratch your itch.
Logged


“Normal is not something to aspire to, it's something to get away from.”
Losfer
Bearded Scumlord
Posts: 3862


The friendliest man on the internet

Member
*


View Profile WWW

Ignore
« Reply #69 on: June 17, 2009, 07:37:36 AM »

I like scratching my back with coprophagia.
Logged

Raziel
Posts: 341


Megaten Fan

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #70 on: June 17, 2009, 12:15:48 PM »

Krauser-sama wants to have a word with this thread.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRvfSDPT-Rw
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  



Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!