Good morning.
- Holiday lighting.
- Some history … “for the kings and princes of Europe the Mohammedans were an alien culture, and not well understood.” Unlike today where they are … soooo familiar. The more things change, the more they remain the same?
- Keep praying for David … an update on his status.
- Congolese massacre.
- Wanna live longer? Be hungry all the time … with the added benefit of course that your longer life will seem longer too.
- A conversation on porn.
- Pointing out an essential difficulty with a Greenwaldian talking point.
- Retiree!? Yah, right. I much prefer, “domestic goddess” for the at-home mom.
- Mr Obama as Magic Negro from the left.
- A followup article to the Africa/Christianity one.
- Hoofing around Munchen.
- Groceries in Malaysia.
- Hmmm.
- A wine bottle trick.
- Khyber pass news.
- I concur.
- Just suffer more?
A conversation on porn.
Typical religious fearmongering. If you look at porn, it may escalate to rape and murder. Except that porn is negatively correlated with rape. Even without the stats, though, the idea that porn leads to rape and murder is completely ridiculous. I’d bet a billion times more harm is caused by making boys and men feel guilty about porn and masturbation than is caused by porn and masturbation in the absence of religious nonsense.
JA,
Actually your correlation is not particularly relevant. We live in a porn drenched environment. Do you think there were more rapes or sexual abuse in say 18th century France or 18th century Puritan New England? Are monks more likely to rape or pimps? Pimps have access to porn after all, monks do not.
Are monks more likely to rape or pimps?
I don’t know, but I think it’s a safe bet that Catholic priests are more likely to rape than, say, police officers or some other arbitrary group (unlike pimps, which is obviously an unfair example.)
Even if you don’t accept my correlation, you must admit that there is zero empirical evidence for the hypothesis that porn causes rape. Personally, I think the opposite is true (not just true, but obviously true) and I provided at least some empirical evidence, however flawed.
JA,
Well, we disagree on this. I think a preoccupation with sex, of which porn is one example, is what leads to more abuse and rape. That preoccupation is part of the particular zeitgeist of the age. Until (if?) that turns around, then progress may be made … but porn is part of that environment making this age what it is.
As for abuse and sexual predation by police officers vs priests (or monastics … being the celibate members of my Christian denomination) are more prevalent in the former than the latter group, although obviously the latter gets more press.
JA,
Question. Is this sort of thing … and the acceptance level of pornography in our culture related?
Question. Is this sort of thing … and the acceptance level of pornography in our culture related?
Not remotely, or at least not causally. Why, do you have any evidence that it is?
JA,
Hmm, I find it hard to imagine that they are not connected, i.e., that our weakening cultural prohibitions regarding sex (of which pornography is just one of a number of obvious markers) is not related to young girls deciding that at 16 it is appropriate to sell sexual services in order to buy designer clothes.
You’re changing your argument already. I thought we were talking about porn causing things, not about porn and other things being two effects of an underlying cause.
JA,
I’m not changiing my argument. Apparently you’ve been making assumptions.
Comment #2: “we live in a porn drenched environment”
Comement #4: “I think a preoccupation with sex, of which porn is one example, is what leads to more abuse and rape. That preoccupation is part of the particular zeitgeist of the age.”
Comment #6: “Is this sort of thing … and the acceptance level of pornography in our culture related?”
See, my argument has been consistent.
Actually your correlation is not particularly relevant. We live in a porn drenched environment. Do you think there were more rapes or sexual abuse in say 18th century France or 18th century Puritan New England? Are monks more likely to rape or pimps? Pimps have access to porn after all, monks do not.
Wouldn’t the relevant question be did 18th Century French pimps rape more or less than 21st century French pimps? I suspect they probably rape less, although good luck trying to get any stats on that. What is clear, though, is that 21 century French pimps have much better access to porn than their 18th Century counterparts.
I should make it clear by ‘they’ I meant modern French pimps probably rape less than their counterparts from 300 years ago. Granted that’s just a guess.
Well, we disagree on this. I think a preoccupation with sex, of which porn is one example, is what leads to more abuse and rape. That preoccupation is part of the particular zeitgeist of the age.
A thesis that should be supported by the facts, not undercut by them. If you find a trend of greater preoccupation with sex you should see a trend of greater abuse and rape. However, all things need to be held equal. One has to likewise compare the changes in opportunities for abuse and rape over time as well as changes in society’s preoccupation with sex.
I suspect that relative to the opportunities for rape, our forefathers did a lot of it despite the relatively low level of quality porn available to them. For example, we know there was a massive amount of slaves who were impregnated by their white owners. While that may not have been mostly violent rape one has to find the consent questionable at least.
Today I think we have a much greater preoccupation with sexual ethics….note how much angst there is over sexual harassment and ‘power imbalances’. Not too long ago the idea of a man marrying his secretary or a college professor meeting his wife as a student would hardly bat an eye. But we also have many more opportunities for rape. Women commonly travel alone and without escort. Transportation is much quickier and easier today than ever before. Population densities are likewise higher in many areas (although our cities are probably a bit less dense….we don’t have the slums that we used too).