Does Pornography Harm Children Who View It?

[Delta4Embassy]

You are really committed to this little agenda of yours aren't you?

Why is this so important to you?

Because violence is bad. Sex is good. So long as the powers that be continue linking both together as when discussing issues and saying "There's too much sex and violence on tv..." To which my assertion is there's too much violence on tv, but not nearly enough sex.

It's been proven in scientific study after study that societies which exemplify violence suffer great rates of violent crime while suppressing sexuality. And societies which exemplify sexuality suffer less violent crime. Give the US's problem with violence one can't help but notice the total reversal we here glorifying one while suppressing the other.

I'm actively involved in efforts to reverse this trend.

Cite three peer reviewed studies that support you assertion.

Only three?

https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/James_W._Prescott.html

1)
Article: Body Pleasure and the Origins of Violence
ERIC - Body Pleasure and the Origins of Violence, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 1975

[first link is actual paper(s), second's verifying it's been reviewed (right side of screen.)

2)
Effects of Pornography on Human Behavior
"Effects of Pornography on Human Behavior"

3)
Influence of New Media on Adolescent Sexual Health: Evidence and Opportunities: Main Page
" Influence of New Media on Adolescent Sexual Health:
Evidence and Opportunities"

Can use Search or Find "peer-" to see where mentions of such are if not immediately visible.

 

[GISMYS]

Pornography DOES Harm Children and anyone Who Views It. Pornography is brain POISON=garbage in=garbage out!!!

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Videos?

My thinking is the thinking of scientists, attorneys, law enforcement, professors, and policy makers.

Who's your thinking shared by?

Cite them. My thinking is shared by the entire psychological community and experts in the field.

Cited mine. Now show me your's.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Pornography DOES Harm Children and anyone Who Views It. Pornography is brain POISON=garbage in=garbage out!!!

Yes, so you've said. We're actually linking to source materials here, if not able to do so stick to Religion and Ethics.

 

[rightwinger]

GOD'S WORD is the last word on any topic. LEARN THAT TRUTH!!!==
3 John 1:11
Beloved, do not imitate evil but imitate good. Whoever does good is from God; whoever does evil has not seen God.

Philippians 4:8
Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.

1 Corinthians 10:13

No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.

NOOOOoooooooo!
GISMYS is back

 

[Delta4Embassy]

GOD'S WORD is the last word on any topic. LEARN THAT TRUTH!!!==
3 John 1:11
Beloved, do not imitate evil but imitate good. Whoever does good is from God; whoever does evil has not seen God.

Philippians 4:8
Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.

1 Corinthians 10:13

No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your ability, but with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it.

And they say the Bible isn't a science textbook when clearly it is, thanks GIS.

 

[GISMYS]

trying my best to interpret health and lifestyle as broadly as possible so as to include religious lifestyles. But if you continue posting off-topic religious stuff in a non-religious thread i will report it.

yes!! Satan and demons hate to see God's Word posted here too!!! =fear of truth!!!

 

[Delta4Embassy]

trying my best to interpret health and lifestyle as broadly as possible so as to include religious lifestyles. But if you continue posting off-topic religious stuff in a non-religious thread i will report it.

yes!! Satan and demons hate to see God's Word posted here too!!! =fear of truth!!!

No, more like fear of spam and loosing the ability to have academic discussions without having them buried by trolls.

Reported.

 

[Michelle420]

No.

Google and read any and every .edu site with a paper about it to your heart's content. Been studying the question for decades and the even the Reagan Administration studied the question, came back with "no" and let the matter drop (silently not publishing the results either by the by.)

Just as violent movies and videogames doesn't then translate into real-world acting out of violent fantasies (as evidenced by such content availability in other countries,) pornography doesn't then result in minors acting out what they saw. Will always be able to find a news item suggesting otherwise, but this is not scientificly valid so much as sensationalism and fear-mongering.

"Research shows that healthy sexual development includes natural curiosity about sexuality. Retrospective studies show that accidental exposure to real-life scenes of sexuality does not harm children. Our survey shows that age of first exposure to pornography does not correlate with negative attitudes towards women. Studies with non-explicit representations of sexuality show that young people who seek out sexualised representations tend to be those with a pre-existing interest in sexuality. These studies also suggest that current generations of children are no more sexualised than previous generations, that they are not innocent about sexuality, and that a key negative effect of this knowledge is the requirement for them to feign ignorance in order to satisfy adults’ expectations of them. Research also suggests important differences between pre- and post-pubescent attitudes towards pornography, and that pornography is not addictive."
Does pornography harm young people? | QUT ePrints

"A vocal segment of the population has serious concerns about the effect of pornography in society and challenges its public use and acceptance. This manuscript reviews the major issues associated with the availability of sexually explicit material. It has been found everywhere scientifically investigated that as pornography has increased in availability, sex crimes have either decreased or not increased."
Pacific Center for Sex and Society - Pornography, Public Acceptance and Sex Related Crime: A Review

"Most of the recent studies in this field have been correlational. That means you ask a sample of young people whether they've seen pornography, or how often, and then ask them what they think of sex or gender role attitudes, for example.

But it is not possible to establish causation from correlational studies, and to say whether pornography is changing or reinforcing attitudes.

"That is the real next step that research needs to take," says Horvath, "to try to identify which came first.""
BBC News - Do we know whether pornography harms people?

Thta's the most important part above, 'it's not possible to establish causation from correlation.' Ethics limit what you can investigate as in you can't expose subjects to particularly violent pornography tosee if it harms them, because what if it does? So you can't scientificly investigate whether porn harms children because to find out you have to expose potentially harmful things to children. Catch-22.

What we can and have discovered if where porn is widely available, sex crimes go down. Where porn is banned and restricted it goes up. When children are raised in nudist enviroments, they don't suffer the same stress over their developing bodies as their clothes-wearing counterparts.

I get people here will opt to make political hay out of this on both sides of the poltical divide while choosing to ignore the research and facts, this is not for them but people more interested in being right than popular.

Do you have children?

 

[Michelle420]

I think it's harmful.

Kids are influenced by everything, a scary bedtime story can send them into nightmares.

Pornography is a filmed production with a goal, and there is all different types of it.

No kid should be exposed to it and it is harmful much in the same way asking a 3 yr old to drive a car is.

The maturity level is not ready to be exposed to it.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

No.

Google and read any and every .edu site with a paper about it to your heart's content. Been studying the question for decades and the even the Reagan Administration studied the question, came back with "no" and let the matter drop (silently not publishing the results either by the by.)

Just as violent movies and videogames doesn't then translate into real-world acting out of violent fantasies (as evidenced by such content availability in other countries,) pornography doesn't then result in minors acting out what they saw. Will always be able to find a news item suggesting otherwise, but this is not scientificly valid so much as sensationalism and fear-mongering.

"Research shows that healthy sexual development includes natural curiosity about sexuality. Retrospective studies show that accidental exposure to real-life scenes of sexuality does not harm children. Our survey shows that age of first exposure to pornography does not correlate with negative attitudes towards women. Studies with non-explicit representations of sexuality show that young people who seek out sexualised representations tend to be those with a pre-existing interest in sexuality. These studies also suggest that current generations of children are no more sexualised than previous generations, that they are not innocent about sexuality, and that a key negative effect of this knowledge is the requirement for them to feign ignorance in order to satisfy adults’ expectations of them. Research also suggests important differences between pre- and post-pubescent attitudes towards pornography, and that pornography is not addictive."
Does pornography harm young people? | QUT ePrints

"A vocal segment of the population has serious concerns about the effect of pornography in society and challenges its public use and acceptance. This manuscript reviews the major issues associated with the availability of sexually explicit material. It has been found everywhere scientifically investigated that as pornography has increased in availability, sex crimes have either decreased or not increased."
Pacific Center for Sex and Society - Pornography, Public Acceptance and Sex Related Crime: A Review

"Most of the recent studies in this field have been correlational. That means you ask a sample of young people whether they've seen pornography, or how often, and then ask them what they think of sex or gender role attitudes, for example.

But it is not possible to establish causation from correlational studies, and to say whether pornography is changing or reinforcing attitudes.

"That is the real next step that research needs to take," says Horvath, "to try to identify which came first.""
BBC News - Do we know whether pornography harms people?

Thta's the most important part above, 'it's not possible to establish causation from correlation.' Ethics limit what you can investigate as in you can't expose subjects to particularly violent pornography tosee if it harms them, because what if it does? So you can't scientificly investigate whether porn harms children because to find out you have to expose potentially harmful things to children. Catch-22.

What we can and have discovered if where porn is widely available, sex crimes go down. Where porn is banned and restricted it goes up. When children are raised in nudist enviroments, they don't suffer the same stress over their developing bodies as their clothes-wearing counterparts.

I get people here will opt to make political hay out of this on both sides of the poltical divide while choosing to ignore the research and facts, this is not for them but people more interested in being right than popular.

Do you have children?

My personal life is irrelevant.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I think it's harmful.

Kids are influenced by everything, a scary bedtime story can send them into nightmares.

Pornography is a filmed production with a goal, and there is all different types of it.

No kid should be exposed to it and it is harmful much in the same way asking a 3 yr old to drive a car is.

The maturity level is not ready to be exposed to it.

Am willing to accept various points of view and opposition when people can show me a study backing that up. So far, the only opposing pov's have been from discredited religious sources. Whereas I've posted numerous peer-reviewed, and scholarly studies shwoing the opposite is in fact true.

 

[Michelle420]

No.

Google and read any and every .edu site with a paper about it to your heart's content. Been studying the question for decades and the even the Reagan Administration studied the question, came back with "no" and let the matter drop (silently not publishing the results either by the by.)

Just as violent movies and videogames doesn't then translate into real-world acting out of violent fantasies (as evidenced by such content availability in other countries,) pornography doesn't then result in minors acting out what they saw. Will always be able to find a news item suggesting otherwise, but this is not scientificly valid so much as sensationalism and fear-mongering.

"Research shows that healthy sexual development includes natural curiosity about sexuality. Retrospective studies show that accidental exposure to real-life scenes of sexuality does not harm children. Our survey shows that age of first exposure to pornography does not correlate with negative attitudes towards women. Studies with non-explicit representations of sexuality show that young people who seek out sexualised representations tend to be those with a pre-existing interest in sexuality. These studies also suggest that current generations of children are no more sexualised than previous generations, that they are not innocent about sexuality, and that a key negative effect of this knowledge is the requirement for them to feign ignorance in order to satisfy adults’ expectations of them. Research also suggests important differences between pre- and post-pubescent attitudes towards pornography, and that pornography is not addictive."
Does pornography harm young people? | QUT ePrints

"A vocal segment of the population has serious concerns about the effect of pornography in society and challenges its public use and acceptance. This manuscript reviews the major issues associated with the availability of sexually explicit material. It has been found everywhere scientifically investigated that as pornography has increased in availability, sex crimes have either decreased or not increased."
Pacific Center for Sex and Society - Pornography, Public Acceptance and Sex Related Crime: A Review

"Most of the recent studies in this field have been correlational. That means you ask a sample of young people whether they've seen pornography, or how often, and then ask them what they think of sex or gender role attitudes, for example.

But it is not possible to establish causation from correlational studies, and to say whether pornography is changing or reinforcing attitudes.

"That is the real next step that research needs to take," says Horvath, "to try to identify which came first.""
BBC News - Do we know whether pornography harms people?

Thta's the most important part above, 'it's not possible to establish causation from correlation.' Ethics limit what you can investigate as in you can't expose subjects to particularly violent pornography tosee if it harms them, because what if it does? So you can't scientificly investigate whether porn harms children because to find out you have to expose potentially harmful things to children. Catch-22.

What we can and have discovered if where porn is widely available, sex crimes go down. Where porn is banned and restricted it goes up. When children are raised in nudist enviroments, they don't suffer the same stress over their developing bodies as their clothes-wearing counterparts.

I get people here will opt to make political hay out of this on both sides of the poltical divide while choosing to ignore the research and facts, this is not for them but people more interested in being right than popular.

Do you have children?

My personal life is irrelevant.

Not really, because if you raised children, you would already know it is harmful.

If you are inexperienced then it explains the dumb question

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Do you have children?

My personal life is irrelevant.

Not really, because if you raised children, you would already know it is harmful.

If you are inexperienced then it explains the dumb question

I figured that was the point you'd try to assert. Let me counter with this:

does a good gynecologist have to be a female?

 

[Delta4Embassy]

If anything, people with kids will have their objectivity blurred in much the same way we loose objectivity engaging in sex too-soon in our relationships before we've formed an objective opinion about a person. In your natural biologically-wired protecting of your kids, you tend to over-react and project opinion onto everyone else instead of relying on science and evidence.

 

[Michelle420]

My personal life is irrelevant.

Not really, because if you raised children, you would already know it is harmful.

If you are inexperienced then it explains the dumb question

I figured that was the point you'd try to assert. Let me counter with this:

does a good gynecologist have to be a female?

Let me counter with this, if you post medical journals suggesting cancer patients are not "helped" by pain medication in the context of a cure, does that mean people who have cancer and feel relief from pain medication shouldn't take it.

Context is everything.

To make a statement that children aren't harmed is bogus.

It's total crap.

You know it and I know it and your fluff is just intellectual masterbation quite frankly because you have an axe to grind with religious people and homophobes.

It's just stupid

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Not really, because if you raised children, you would already know it is harmful.

If you are inexperienced then it explains the dumb question

I figured that was the point you'd try to assert. Let me counter with this:

does a good gynecologist have to be a female?

Let me counter with this, if you post medical journals suggesting cancer patients are not "helped" by pain medication in the context of a cure, does that mean people who have cancer and feel relief from pain medication shouldn't take it.

Context is everything.

To make a statement that children aren't harmed is bogus.

It's total crap.

You know it and I know it and your fluff is just intellectual masterbation quite frankly because you have an axe to grind with religious people and homophobes.

It's just stupid

In conjunction with the statement I included proofs. I'm not offering opinions but peer-reviewed science.

And if going to talk about this stuff you might wanna learn how to spell 'masturbation.'

 

[Michelle420]

I figured that was the point you'd try to assert. Let me counter with this:

does a good gynecologist have to be a female?

Let me counter with this, if you post medical journals suggesting cancer patients are not "helped" by pain medication in the context of a cure, does that mean people who have cancer and feel relief from pain medication shouldn't take it.

Context is everything.

To make a statement that children aren't harmed is bogus.

It's total crap.

You know it and I know it and your fluff is just intellectual masterbation quite frankly because you have an axe to grind with religious people and homophobes.

It's just stupid

In conjunction with the statement I included proofs. I'm not offering opinions but peer-reviewed science.

And if going to talk about this stuff you might wanna learn how to spell 'masturbation.'

Peer reviewed journals are just mental masterbation amongst liberal scholars.

And.....they are also just opinions. I read them alot because Professors are in love with them.

You can intellectualize anything but that does not account for feelings.

The brain does not fully mature until you are around 25.

Your topic is simply to troll religious people and homophobes.

Yet, there are real children (not teens) who have been exposed and felt different then what peer journals supposedly report.

At any rate I only came to the thread because NLT posted a link to it.

I said my opinion about it and I am not religious or homophobic so I will let you get back to taunting your real audience.

 

[westwall]

Because violence is bad. Sex is good. So long as the powers that be continue linking both together as when discussing issues and saying "There's too much sex and violence on tv..." To which my assertion is there's too much violence on tv, but not nearly enough sex.

It's been proven in scientific study after study that societies which exemplify violence suffer great rates of violent crime while suppressing sexuality. And societies which exemplify sexuality suffer less violent crime. Give the US's problem with violence one can't help but notice the total reversal we here glorifying one while suppressing the other.

I'm actively involved in efforts to reverse this trend.

Cite three peer reviewed studies that support you assertion.

Only three?

https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/James_W._Prescott.html

1)
Article: Body Pleasure and the Origins of Violence
ERIC - Body Pleasure and the Origins of Violence, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 1975

[first link is actual paper(s), second's verifying it's been reviewed (right side of screen.)

2)
Effects of Pornography on Human Behavior
"Effects of Pornography on Human Behavior"

3)
Influence of New Media on Adolescent Sexual Health: Evidence and Opportunities: Main Page
" Influence of New Media on Adolescent Sexual Health:
Evidence and Opportunities"

Can use Search or Find "peer-" to see where mentions of such are if not immediately visible.

So, what do YOU think the three links you provided say? I have read them and their associated lit review. So now I am curious what exactly it is you think they say.


[MENTION=46449]Delta4Embassy[/MENTION]

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Until or unless one of your posts is an apology and acknowledgement that assertions I've made are widely held positions by the science-community West, this conversation is over and serves no useful purpose.