Efforts to regulate free porn distribution

Discussion in 'Porn Addiction' started by mjones050505, Jul 1, 2019.

Would you support the regulation of "free porn"?

Poll closed Jul 8, 2019.
  1. Yes

    65.8%
  2. No

    34.2%
  1. mjones050505

    mjones050505 Fapstronaut

    40
    54
    18
    I never suggested banning porn altogether. I just think it's too easy to get to free porn. If it requires paying for it, that might be enough of a deterrent to keep some people from being tempted. I never went to sites where I had to pay or give my CC info. It would certainly help keep kids out of it; I'm saddened by all the posts on NoFap by young teens who are already fighting addiction.
     
    randomname3 and Doupleastronaut like this.
  2. ZenAF

    ZenAF Fapstronaut

    455
    678
    93
    If watching porn is voyeurism, what term are we going to use for voyeurism? Or, as I tried to elude to with my war movie example, do you simply abandon the distinction between watching a pre-recorded video and secretly watching real people who are unaware that you're watching them?

    I don't like the fact that people around here get into a witch hunt mentality just because they had a bad time with porn. We're all running with the grand narrative here: Porn is evil, avoid it. But lets not forget why we've arrived at that narrative. It's our fault that we got into hell, not porn's fault. Nobody forced us to watch any videos. We have free will, we chose to engage into pathological behavior with porn, not the other way around. Porn is a neutral, passive phenomenon. We are the agents that turn it into something pleasurable and destructive. If you don't understand that, you'll be addicted forever, believe me.

    Nothing is wrong with cocaine. I wouldn't want to take it away from society. It's a drug made from a plant. If YOU control yourself you can have some great time with cocaine and never get into the sort of hell that you got into through porn.

    Just because something has a high chance of making you addicted doesn't make it inherently bad. Taking that sort of stuff away from society is like treating people like infants which need to be controlled and supervised. I don't want to further that sort of thinking. It makes us weak and irresponsible because you never learn to keep yourself in check, because the government does it for you.

    I don't know and I don't think we'll ever know for sure. Too many people watch porn and way too small percentage of them would or has ever taken part in a survey.
     
    need4realchg likes this.
  3. IR254

    IR254 Fapstronaut

    390
    1,463
    123
    We would call that voyeurism. There is no difference between the two, despite a screen being used. That difference is insignificant though. The core behavior -sitting and watching real sexual activity by other people - behind both activities is identical. That's why both fall into the category 'voyeurism" (which doesn't necessarily have to happen secretly, as far as I'm concerned). And in regards to your movie example: I really don't see any parallels of watching a war movie & being in war for real to watching porn & watching sex in reality. In my opinion, your example doesn't work.

    Let's say that assessment would be true: Porn would still be voyeuristic. If you want to be consequent with your line of thought, you'd have to say, that voyeurism is neutral as well and we as a society just make it seem bad. If that's your opinion, then more power to you. I don't buy into that notion, however. I do think, that there are things in life, which are either inheretly good or bad respectively. I think porn and voyeurism are part of the "bad" spectrum (of course there are "bad" behaviors, which are worse than others). And just to avoid misunderstandings here: Porn isn't bad, because it's possibly addicting. The addictive nature isn't even part of that equation.

    In regards to what you said about this community starting kind of a witch hunt: I can agree to that. This community turns into a cult-like group more and more as time passes. Views get more extreme, argumentations are often unlogical in it's core and a kind of irrational sense of believe grows among members. The subreddit for example is already so strange, one can hardly take it seriously anymore. We have to try to stop the extremism among our fellow members as far as we can, if we want this community to be taken seriously in the eyes of outsiders.
     
    The Lone Ranger and need4realchg like this.
  4. ZenAF

    ZenAF Fapstronaut

    455
    678
    93
    Of course there's a difference between the two. People who record porn in most cases know they record porn. They know what porn is, they know strangers will look at it as soon as the material is online to jerk off to it. They agree with it. Unlike most targets of voyeurism. That definitely makes a difference from a moral perspective, wouldn't you say?

    No psychologist in their right mind would diagnose that giant part of the population that watches porn to have a psychological disorder. While on the other hand I very much agree that if you go outside to jerk off to people without them knowing that you're watching, you got some loose screws.

    So the only similarity is that in both cases people watch other people fuck. But you need to give me a good reason why I should ignore the context that surrounds that action, because context matters. Especially if you're going to judge it in a moral sense.

    To conclude I suspect that the true reason you guys chose to use the term voyeurism on people who watch porn is because you want to further demonize that which hurt you, not because you actually think the term is accurate.
    Voyeurism is abhorrent for the reason I've stated and if you can link that to watching porn it gives you another weapon against it. I can understand that. But I don't think it's right, because of the same reason it's wrong to call it rape when a guy touched a girl without her consent. It's inflation of language and stands in the way of fruitful discourse.
    ?? xD Voyeurism is an action, porn is a medium. You can't call porn voyeuristic in and off itself, you're losing ground here. If anything you need to compare the act of watching porn to voyeurism.
    Things aren't good or bad. Actions are.
    It's only natural. People are desperate. But I'll keep calling out any thread that in it's essence always hints at the same pathological mindset: The shifting of responsibility for ones own addiction away from oneself and over to porn.
     
    andi1987 and need4realchg like this.
  5. IR254

    IR254 Fapstronaut

    390
    1,463
    123
    Morals are irrelevant for the question, if watching porn is voyeurism or not. Therefore, the consent of the performers doesn't matter in the least. You're watching others for sexual pleasure, which per definition is voyeurism in my book.

    Voyeurism isn't voyeuristic disorder as far as I'm concerned. A behavior can be voyeurism without being necessarily pathological in the sense, that a psychologist would diagnose a disorder. It's just like gaming isn't gaming disorder or gambling isn't gambling disorder.

    That's what I meant. Pardon my wording, english isn't my mother tongue. "The act of watching porn is voyeuristic" would have been the proper way of saying it I guess.

    Same applies here as well. The act of watching porn is an action though, so no problem with the definition here. So, it can very well be inheretly good or bad.

    I'm sure there are people here, for whom this accusation would apply. I can only speak for myself, when I say I do find the term voyeurism accurate to describe the act of watching porn.

    Also, the rape comparison doesn't work for the same reason your movie example didn't work. You compare totally different things: If we look at voyeurismin real-life and voyeurism via a screen, the difference is basically non-existent. You sit there and watch other people in sexual context. Whereas when you compare touching a girl and raping her, it's a entirely different degree of actions, thus the term "rape" would not be accurate to describe both of them. I don't want inflation of language to happen either, but I don't see how calling the act of watching porn voyeurism would fall in that category. It's the same thing.
     
    need4realchg likes this.
  6. ZenAF

    ZenAF Fapstronaut

    455
    678
    93
    We'll have to disagree here. You didn't give me a reason why I should ignore the context of the action just to make the term fit.
    Also, if you're not trying to find another weapon against porn, why are you calling it voyeurism? Why agree with the guy who introduced the term in this conversation and linked it to a psychological disorder?

    My first example was to point to the difference of experiencing something via screen vs real life. I'm not going to argue with you whether there is a difference there or not, because I think that is, meaning no offense, silly.

    My second example was one of inflation of language, nothing else.

    And I disagree, morals are relevant when talking about whether watching porn is voyeurism or not, because real voyeurism is morally plain wrong by default. While watching porn is wrong as soon as you abuse it to a level where it worsens your life.

    Are you really going to compare a creep, that hides in the bushes (for his first time!!) of a public bath jerking off to some chicks who are lying in the sun, to a dude who sits at home jerking off to a porn video for the first time? Really? And you're not inflating language, you sure?....
     
  7. IR254

    IR254 Fapstronaut

    390
    1,463
    123
    Well, I gave you a reason but you seem to either just don't understand it or you disagree with it, which is fine to me.

    Simply because the act of watching porn fits the definition of the term "voyeurism". In my initial post, I gave three definitions of the term (only one of them consiting an element of secrecy by the way) and watching porn fits, therefore it can be considered voyeurism.

    I didn't agree with him or his link to a psychological disorder. My initial post was directed at your statement that "porn is not voyeurism". I disagreed with that statement and made my post. But to be fair, I maybe could have made it clearer that I'm talking about voyeurism and not voyeuristic disorder. I'll have to admit that.

    I guess we can only agree to disagree here. If we want to find out, if a behavior fits into a specific defintion or not, we have to look at the definition. Since the definition(s) (I refer to the three I gave before) do(es) not contain an element of morality (e.g. "voyeurism is the practive of gaining sexual pleasure by observing others in a morally reprehensible way"), we can decide whether the term fits or not without moral judgement. Therefore we have to ask ourselves the two following questions:
    a) Is watching porn "observing others"? I think it's clear, that it is.
    b) Does one gain sexual pleasure by watching porn? That's a no-brainer, of course you do! That's it's entire purpose
    We see, that the act of watching porn neatly fits the defintion and can therefore be called voyeurism.

    Maybe you understand my standpoint better, when I give you a bit of background of myself: I come from a criminal law background. In law school we learn, that an actions can fit legal terminology without being a crime. For example: When a doctor cuts you while doing surgery, it is still considered assault. Does the doctor have to face punishment? No, of course not because his actions happened with consent of the patient (hopefully). So, you see that the term still applies neatly and yet, the results are completly different. You can apply the same framework to the term "voyeurism" as well, as I tried to make clear.

    In addiction to that I disagree, that porn is only morally bad as soon as you start to abuse it. But whatever, this would be an entirely different discussion, which would go way beyond the discussion about voyeurism.

    Yes, I'm comparing the two and yes, I am sure. The only difference between the two is the moral judgement we make about them. Obviously the creep is acting way more morally reprehensible than the watcher of porn. But as I tried to point out above, morals are irrelevant when we decide about terminology. Both actions can be called voyeurism without being identical when it comes to morals. I reject the notion, that this is inflation of language.
     
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2019
  8. Robinthehood

    Robinthehood Fapstronaut

    Impossible to do this effectively. I doubt any western countries would be happy to accept North Korea type censorship etc. Take responsibility and find the strength within to fight this, don't expect others to sort it out.
     
  9. Doupleastronaut

    Doupleastronaut Fapstronaut

    174
    44
    28
    but shut up, you only say nonsense
     
  10. need4realchg

    need4realchg Fapstronaut

    (Head slap).

    @Doupleastronaut Thank you for your 2nd grade contribution to what was previously a respectful and Intellectual debate.

    IMO most of the comments reflect an innate belief or disbelief to rely on the government to get anything right.

    Here in one of richest countries in the world, we typically find that government solutions are bloated, long winded and inept at most tasks—-so solutions using federal resources (such as banning) would largely be effective.

    But if you subscribe to a liberal or progressive view of government (like many of our friends do in other western /european countries), then you probably support the government’s ideas even when daft.

    I am more libertarian leaning and have already written about the UK initiative—-this will only drive business up. It’s basic economics. A porn dvd was absurdly costly before. With this , demand will surge back to them. It’s a short-sighted view to think all pornographers operate the same. Plus we watch porn via internet tv— this is just a pipe dream to think one avenue will make a difference. It will force porn users over 50 to update their avenues to watching it or start paying.

    Most porn is shared via what ? Internet ? It will simply move platforms. Like it has already for the younger generations. Move to text/peer to peer app sharing platforms like snap chat.

    It’s a feel good initiative nothing less. A fake news way to declare a war on porn won, that is not. It will be just more difficult to control or monitor without moving the entire country towards a police state of all electronic devices.

    Of course as a libertarian —- that’s my greatest concern; I would find the government policing all devices to be a unacceptable reality.

    Personally I’m glad I’m beating this thing now because I don’t want to see my porn history used against me in a court Of law or a court of public opinion. Imagine Facebook leaking your search history on your profile as a way of blacklisting people deemed “potential terrorists or sex addicts.”
     
    Last edited: Jul 4, 2019
  11. wwtl

    wwtl Fapstronaut

    322
    466
    93
    Putting a stop to production is enough and well justified. No need to censor the Internet.
     
  12. ZenAF

    ZenAF Fapstronaut

    455
    678
    93
    What you avoid in your analysis is the cultural common use of the term voyeurism as well as your motivation of why you apply it to watching porn.
    When you ask anybody what voyeurism is, they will think of creeps watching other people in real life. That's the common use of the word. That means the word is negatively charged (which from a law perspective has no weight of course, but this isn't a discussion about law). And the fact that the word is negatively charged is why the first guy brought it up in this conversation in the first place. And then your analytical mind goes "well technically that's true! watching porn is voyeurism".
    Ignoring that society uses this term to describe creeps, not people who watch porn. Also bringing about the problem that we would then need a stronger term to describe real voyeurism, since virtual voyeurism is technically already voyeurism in a sense. Why? Because watching something in real life and watching something on a video isn't the same thing. So we need a different word or our language is diluted.
    Again that may not be the case when your wording a statement as a lawyer, but for day to day communication these distinctions very much matter.


    Of course you can ignore the distinction between real life and a video, ignore the context, ignore the moral difference of the actions and be technical about it, but for what purpose I ask.
     
  13. IR254

    IR254 Fapstronaut

    390
    1,463
    123
    That's what you say. Do you have any data or source to back it up? I doubt it. You're argument is based on your subjective perspective on what voyeurism is and isn't. It doesn't follow any intrinsic logic in the sense, that the use of the term follows specific rules (e.g. does the action fit the definition?).

    I listed three definitions of the word from three different major dictionaries. Watching porn fit in every out of the three. So, where do these dictionaries get their defintions from? That must be the question. The answer is: From society. From the cultural consensus. So, that indicates that you're assumption probably isn't so clear as you might think it is.

    It has no weight from a terminological perspective as well. Law is exactly that to a large degree btw.

    We do not need a new word. We can use the same word for both, since they are essentially the same thing.

    To describe the behaviors accurately. If the behavior is the same in it's core, it's plausible to use the same term. There is no need to have a own word for every behavior, which has a tiny little difference from another. If you look at it this way, you could actually say that exactly that would be inflation of language. Maybe we could make a little comparison: When we breath through the nose, we fill our lungs with air. When we breath through the mouth, we fill our lungs with air. The core of both actions is the same, that's why we use the term "breathing" for both actions, although they are slightly different from one another. In my opinion, watching other people in sexual context in real life or through a screen is essentially identical.
     
  14. ZenAF

    ZenAF Fapstronaut

    455
    678
    93
    @IR254

    I find it mindblowing that you think watching people on a screen and observing people in real life without them knowing is the same thing. :D No point furthering this discussion if you willingly ignore the difference and the importance of not using the same terminology.
     
  15. Freebliss

    Freebliss Fapstronaut

    82
    6
    8
    I hate this addiction I wouldn’t wish it on my son and I’ve warned him about it. But I wouldn’t support the government controlling it. People have to take responsibility for them selfs. I would be for educating children about this epidemic. Put the truth on them let them decide and if they cross the line then they know they weren’t lied to.
     
    need4realchg likes this.
  16. IR254

    IR254 Fapstronaut

    390
    1,463
    123
    I don't ignore anything. There simply is no difference, which would be big enough to justify the use of different terms.

    But yes, I agree. Pretty much everything has been said already. At this point, we can only repeat ourselves. No point in furthering the discussion.
     
  17. diep

    diep Fapstronaut

    The government should step in to regulate the porn distribution system. They have to make it not affordable and accessible to everybody, especially children. It is like you have to take a trip to a place to watch porn instead of watching it at home. The current situation favors the guy who create and distribute porn on Internet. No need to make a big step like banning porn all at once. What they need to do is a small and gradual step to disrupt current system which makes money on porn. I know this will be a cat and mouse game, just like the War on drugs. But this is necessary for society.
     
  18. Hros

    Hros Fapstronaut

    1,239
    3,135
    143
    You do realize this is a site that advocates against P, right?
     
    randomname3 and diep like this.
  19. Clean Willy

    Clean Willy Fapstronaut

    185
    290
    63
    I agree with all you have said in this thread @IR254. You have also spoken respectfully to the other member. well done. :)
     
    need4realchg and IR254 like this.
  20. bken

    bken Fapstronaut

    885
    1,297
    123
    The human brain will make no distinction whatsoever. If you've read YBOP you will know.

    Why will the human brain not make this distinction, I imagine you asking, because, pornography will shut off the brain's neocortex and stop you from being able to rationalize the content you are seeing. It will do this by literally decreasing blood flow to the brain's frontal lobes. Dr. Judith Reisman was the first to call pornographic content an erototoxin, she's concluded it will hijack the brain by redirecting blood flow from the neocortex down into the brain's core, bypassing rational control. In other words, porn just happens to you. You have no say over how you react to what you are seeing. This is basically why porn is dangerous and why it can lead to an addiction incredibly fast. Hypofrontality has indeed been examined in porn addicts, the damage being as bad as that seen in cocaine, meth, opioid or heroin addicts.

    Voyeurism is derived from the French verb voir, which means to watch. Given that the sole purpose of pornography is to literally watch it and experience sexual pleasure at the same time, it would most definitely classify as voyeurism. To add to this, how do you know the actors you are seeing on screen have given you personal permission to watch them have sex? Right... They didn't. You could argue that they have abandoned their rights by selling them to the porn industry, in which case you as a voyeur (watcher) are basically enabling prostitution. If that is your personal understanding of fun I don't know what else to say.
     
    Big Lebowski, diep and need4realchg like this.

Share This Page