Should all porn be banned?

Author: Best.Korea

Posts

Total: 95
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 272
Posts: 7,869
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@RationalMadman
Porn is a fantastic thing for single people who aren't getting laid to use to aid their orgasms
Science disagrees. In fact, porn addicts end up with less freedom, less happiness, less will to live, depression... and a bunch of sexual perversions that they learned about thanks to porn.

Literally society became worse with porn being available. It doesnt help those who cant get laid. It merely teases them lmao

RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 566
Posts: 19,930
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Best.Korea
I had a different experience with porn, so I really don't give a damn. I also know others who did. If anything when I was feeling particularly down, orgasms were literally nature's way of making me want to live at times.
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,070
3
2
4
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
4
-->
@Best.Korea
knowingly risk harms to humans, including children, in exchange for any of our liberties
Ok, so you agree that its okay to harm children for your pleasure lmao
It's you that argues that it's okay to harm children for your pleasure. 
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,070
3
2
4
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
4
Even if this wasn't idiotic, how do you define "all porn", is Hustler porn, Playboy, Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue, underwear ads, olympic volleyball....where do you draw the line, who draws the line.

If freedom of speech becomes a matter of whether or not you approve, then there is no freedom of speech.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 272
Posts: 7,869
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@RationalMadman
Society was better before porn. Porn serves no role in society other than making people feel worse and less motivated. Maybe it helps some people who are lonely, but most people end up worse than without porn. So the harm outweights the benefit.

The only way you can argue that its freedom would be to argue that it doesnt cause harm to others that others didnt consent to.

Now, it obviously causes harm to women in porn, but they consent to harm.

It causes harm to addicts, but lets say they consent to harm.

However, if we agree that it causes harm to children by:
1) Children being exposed to porn,
2) Adults who watch porn are more likely to molest kids due to porn creating perversions,
3) Children exposed to porn are more likely to later end up molesting a child.

Therefore, if the only point of porn is your pleasure, and if it results in harming children, it follows that you are harming children for your pleasure.

The only way you can negate this is by saying:
1) Porn doesnt harm children
2) Children, just like adults, consent to harm

Now, obviously, both of these are absurd positions to hold. All statistics point that 1) is not true. And children obviously cant consent to harm when they dont even know that porn is harmful for them, so 2) doesnt work.

Simply, you cannot hold a position that "hurting others is freedom". Everyone who studied freedom morality argues that you cannot use your freedom to cause harm to others, given that others didnt consent to be harmed in such way.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 272
Posts: 7,869
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
"Most of the teens in our survey (73%) reported that they have seen online pornography. Of those who said they have seen it, 54% reported that they saw it by age 13, including the 15% surveyed who saw pornography for the first time before they turned 11."

Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 272
Posts: 7,869
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
Also, notice:

BDSM porn is literally available on YouTube. It is available in public too during gay parades.

If men showing their naked asses in public and whipping each other's asses in public is good for children to see, then we might be having a bit of a problem with our mentality as society.
Slainte
Slainte's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 131
1
5
9
Slainte's avatar
Slainte
1
5
9
-->
@oromagi
@Best.Korea
The concern I have is the overall logic that you are using, and Oro was applying that logic to other areas.

We can agree that access to Porn for children is not good for them.  We also agree that a childs access to many other things, such as guns, chemicals, alcohol, driugs etc etc. is not good for them.

So what is the process you can use that justifies a ban on one item, and not a ban on the others.  How do you reconcile that?

Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 272
Posts: 7,869
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Slainte
So what is the process you can use that justifies a ban on one item, and not a ban on the others.  How do you reconcile that?
There is nothing to reconcile, given that the only purpose of porn is to cause sexual pleasure which results in harm.

If you want to stay consistent with "you have freedom until you start hurting others", then its irrelevant how many examples of allowed harm you point out.

Its not the inconsistency in my logic, rather it is inconsistency in Oromagi's logic.

If you say "You have freedom until you start hurting others", and then proceed to do bunch of things that hurt others, it is you who is inconsistent with your logic. Me pointing out that you are inconsistent, and then you bringing more examples of your inconsistency, does not make you any more consistent.

Its really simple.

Either you agree or disagree with the following:

"People should never have freedom to hurt others only for pleasure".

If you agree, then you cannot possibly approve of porn. If you disagree, then you dont have a moral system at all.
Slainte
Slainte's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 131
1
5
9
Slainte's avatar
Slainte
1
5
9
-->
@Best.Korea
So this is about the objective view of porn, being only used for pleasure.

"People should never have freedom to hurt others only for pleasure".
While the above sentence makes perfect sense, I do not think that is what you are saying through your arguments.  

What it appears that you are saying is:

"People should not gain pleasure from anything that in its creation, and distribution, may cause, or has caused harm to someone else"

Someone watching porn is not trying to, or in actuality directly harming another.  While the consumption of porn creates a market demand, and thereby may contribute to human trafficking, there are a number of legitimate producers and studios who are regulated and do not engage in that conduct.  

My issue with your stance is not about a moral compass, it is about the tangental reach of cause and effect.  
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 272
Posts: 7,869
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Slainte
Someone watching porn is not trying to, or in actuality directly harming another.
That does not negate responsibility.

Your freedom to have porn on internet harms children.

Your freedom causes harm to children.

Therefore, either people should have freedom to do that which harms children, either they shouldnt.
Slainte
Slainte's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 131
1
5
9
Slainte's avatar
Slainte
1
5
9
-->
@Best.Korea
Your freedom to have porn on internet harms children.
You did not say ban porn from the internet.  You said ban it outright

You did not say, make sure all porn is behind a paywall or age-gate, you said ban it.

You appear to say there is a moral issue with the entire concept of porn, and now you are saying it is an ease of access problem.  Which is it?  With respect my friend, you are hopping around a bit here. 

Is it the industry?
Is it the access?
Does the logic you use for porn apply to other issues in the same way?

It appears to me that you are anti-porn and focusing on the children access issue, when in fact you have a deeper moral issue that is hard to argue requires outlawing.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 272
Posts: 7,869
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Slainte
Look, you are obviously not interested in honest debate, given that you intentionally play clueless about what I am saying. So we part ways.
Slainte
Slainte's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 131
1
5
9
Slainte's avatar
Slainte
1
5
9
-->
@Best.Korea
In actuality I am being very clear, and quoting your words, and reading your posts and trying to understand.    I just asked three questions.  I am not sure what debating means to you.  To me it means resolving what the stance is before debating it.  Isn't that what we do?  Feel free to post an actual debate on your topic, defined  properly, and I will happily engage.
hey-yo
hey-yo's avatar
Debates: 24
Posts: 382
1
2
4
hey-yo's avatar
hey-yo
1
2
4
-->
@Intelligence_06
What platform style would you suggest ?
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 167
Posts: 3,837
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
-->
@hey-yo
Basically, make porn resources like that on the dark web, except on the regular internet.

You would need a specific key to access downloadable materials, except the key is not open to the public. Why would anyone want or not want the key is unknown, but such restrictions would probably work.

I would suggest making them less likely to appear on the web browser based on the algorithm, instead of relying on external safety measures.
PriyanshG
PriyanshG's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1
0
0
1
PriyanshG's avatar
PriyanshG
0
0
1
-->
@Intelligence_06
First of all, children "can" access it and most of them do. The debate would be more simplified if we understand this that children do access it. 

You are right about the porn companies, they just want to make money and they don't give any thought towards preventing its exposure to children. So, their is even more reason to ban it now. 
Prostitution is a very old profession, no doubt about it. But through technology, its propagation has severely changed. And about your other point about having a security key- just tell me how would you implement it? Also many great people on earth suggest that porn shouldn't be something that benefits you in the long run. 
IlDiavolo
IlDiavolo's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,245
3
2
5
IlDiavolo's avatar
IlDiavolo
3
2
5
-->
@Best.Korea
I don't know if my experience can help in this thread, but I started to see porn at 9yo with my brothers and friends when internet didn't exist, at least not at home (early 90s). Where there is a will there is a way, so we always figured out how to get a vhs tape porn.

I think it's parents' responsability to take care of what their children watch or not, because at the end the service is paid by them and there are plenty of available tools to achieve that, so there is no excuse to ban a vital service like porn.  😁
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 272
Posts: 7,869
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@IlDiavolo
but I started to see porn at 9yo
I started at 7 or 8. Cant even remember exactly. Plus, back then kids could buy porn. The older kid buys porn and brings it to younger kids. No one cared. Now kids can find porn in 5 seconds and still no one cares lmao
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 3,205
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@Best.Korea
In America, kids can find almost 'anything on the internet,
And 'much everywhere else.

Difficult to roll back,
When freedom is 'so much in the society,
The freedom is not 'absolute,
But one 'can compare it to other countries, or earlier times in America, and note the difference in censorship, freedom of expression.

I'm not saying the freedom is good or bad,
Just that it's 'everywhere in society.
“Men intrinsically do not trust new things that they have not experienced themselves.”
― Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince
. . .

I also suspect that 'any activity, done just for fun,
Might 'still have instances of tangential harm,
And as Slainte says, there's other options besides remove it 'completely.
. . .

If one removes it 'completely, would people not be harmed,
By the removal of their freedom?

Porn is not something that is comparable to murder,
In the harm it's 'existence 'might cause.

Some person might want to keep a glass vase with flowers in their house,
Because it is pretty,
A person can break the vase and commit suicide with it,
Ought all vases be banned?

My point is scale.
I 'think.
. .

Alcohol, junk food.
. . .

Easier to ban something in a 'new society, than an existing one.
'Why people don't form new cities?
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 272
Posts: 7,869
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Lemming
If one removes it 'completely, would people not be harmed,
By the removal of their freedom?
If their freedom harms others, then do we still care about such freedom? If such freedom destroys freedom and life of others? Because putting porn on internet results in children seeing porn. There is no way around that statement.
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 3,205
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@Best.Korea
Eating or watching other's eat McDonalds harms kids,
As it is more snack than food,
And this experience leans kids towards unhealthy eating habits later in life,
Bad nutrition can lead to depression, weight gain, more difficulty in personal relationships.

Internet is a bit like people just talking to each other (I think)
. .
An individual has knowledge,
Stores it externally in computer,
Communicates through computer to another individual's computer.
. .

I 'think there are multiple internets,

I think you're best off banning it from a government backed network,
Than 'all networks.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 272
Posts: 7,869
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Lemming
Let me explain it in a different way.

Should adult have right to show porn to children?

If not, then why are adults allowed to show porn to children by placing it on the internet where children will obviously see it?

It logically follows that adults shouldnt expose children to porn by placing it on the internet.
If it is wrong to expose children to porn, then it logically follows that adults shouldnt expose children to porn by placing it on the internet.
It is wrong to expose children to porn.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 272
Posts: 7,869
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
So the only way to negate this is to say that children arent harmed by porn.

In that case, why does it say "+18"?

Because if children arent harmed by porn, why are people not allowed to directly show porn to children?
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 3,205
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@Best.Korea
Should adults have the right to expose porn to children?
'Maybe not,
Though some ambiguities arrive in the definition of porn,
Arrive in the question of sex education,
Though I suppose one might not call nudist societies porn, or teaching aids porn, or certain entertainment porn.
. .
The kids will treat various content not traditionally 'called porn, as porn though.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 

I think a 'better argument is that porn should be more difficult to access online,

You could argue a separate internet be created for kids to use,
That has a more limited selection,
Only allowing sites that have been vetted.

Or just not allow kids access to the internet,
I didn't have internet as a kid,
Except at school or the library.
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 272
Posts: 7,869
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Lemming
Or just not allow kids access to the internet
Thats difficult. At best, you can keep them away from internet until they are 8-9.
With all their friends on internet, not allowing a kid on internet might cause social exclusion.

But yes, if people disagree that porn should be banned, they should at least agree to make it harder to find.

But again, the problem is: Older kids find porn and show it to younger kids. Older kids figure out how to find it.
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 3,205
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@Best.Korea
Fair points in #56,
But really the internet, has a 'ton of material, not even related to sex,
That one would think parents might be more nervous about their kids having access to.

And I 'really do think,
That unless one scrubbed 'all references,
Kids are going to find material, even in content not 'explicitly described as porn.
. .

There's also the issue of how vast the internet is,
I think it's more the parents duty to limit the internet if it ought be limited.

To Catch a Predator,
Another example, in which I would think parents would say, no internet and talking to strangers,
Though I don't know what the statistics are.
. .

But again,
The government 'has the option,
With how much it bails and backs businesses,
Of creating a mainstream internet,
With more rules than people would prefer 'usually on their private internet.

Public Libraries are Public Something or Others, government funding I assume.
Unless Privately funded Public Library,
But it's not as though Porn stores or Movie Theaters are supposed to let kids in,
Problem is that Internet isn't so clear defined,
It's just people talking, 'kid of, 'maybe,
Sure there are sites,
But it's vast,
I could any user here to send me an email with This or That content,
And 'eventually would probably get something,
I'm not asking though.
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,689
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Normalcy in nature or history is no guarantee of superiority or acceptability.  Certainly the kids won't melt after seeing porn. They'll still grow up, be productive, have families; but maybe they'll be a lot more casual about sex. Maybe that was a detriment in early civilization but is a net benefit now that we have contraceptives?

I don't know. It could be debated, but these are not trivial matters. I distrust flippant attitudes on it.
  • I agree with all this as reasons to remain skeptical about the degree and scale of harm exposure to porn generally inflicts on children.

hey-yo
hey-yo's avatar
Debates: 24
Posts: 382
1
2
4
hey-yo's avatar
hey-yo
1
2
4
-->
@Intelligence_06
Yeah that makes sense. If everything is encrypted and requires a key, then no in cn just search for it. Websites would begin with a blank or whimsy designed login/join screen instead of "are you 18? Click here regardless" icon. With everything upfront to see. 

I am not sure how this would be regulated outside a ministry of porn. All references intact. 

Do you think there couod be a blend of govt. Private sector cooperation to make it happen or would everything be govt. controlled?
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,178
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8