I completely agree with this Bill. It's disgusting to think that someone finds it "kinky" to watch a women being raped, or having sex with a dead person and that their "rights" should be protected. What about the people in the video being raped???
Case in point of what I was saying about some people having a complete inability to tell fantasy from reality. Apparently it never dawned on them that the people in this porn aren't actually getting raped, but are doing a form of role-play, and that there are actually people (including women), who get off on the idea of losing control.
Surely the people that like to watch "kinky porn" agree that there is a line, and surely if people cross the line should held accountable (and I'm talking about extreme cases, not just someone who finds bondage kinky).
There's no real difference, it's just a matter of degree and what the subject matter is.
They say the ultimate pornography is murder, don't you think that these videos are stepping-stones to the ultimate act?
No. Fantasizing about even death fetish doesn't in any way make me or any other sane person want to go out and start killing other people, just like playing Halo and other such games doesn't, and watching violent mainstream movies doesn't make me want to kill people either - and I own a gun (ironically a British gun). Gee imagine that. Mayhaps a deranged person who can't tell the difference between fantasy and reality might have an interest in such violent media instead of violent media causing a person to become deranged? My, what a novel and logical idea...
Don't you watch porn to fulfil your fantasies?
Key word = "fantasy". You know what that is, right? As in not real?
I think if this becomes "acceptable" behaviour, then people will be able to argue that processing child-porn is just as innocent.
Oh, look, she brought out the kiddie porn, how about that. And this, Victoria, is what's referred to as a strawman argument. It's where you use an extreme and simplified example to argue your case against, because you completely lack the ability to make a logical arguement based on fact, so you have to rely on emotionalism and scare tactics. But to answer that question, no, it can't be argued that child porn would ever be legal, because children, unlike adults, are unable to give consent, and there is verifiable evidence to show that children who are the victims of this are mentally scarred by their experience.
Sorry if it comes off as strange for me to do this here, but there is no way for me to comment on this story and refute her there, so this is the next best thing.
At least there are some sane people there, and someone who might actually be an authority on the issue being as he's actually a head doctor:
Speaking as a psychologist who has taught for nearly 10 years the alleged links between violent media and aggression, I think we need to take a step back here. Despite popular assumptions that watching violent images 'causes' aggression, the evidence (around 1000 published studies) that it does is contradictory and far from conclusive. It is one thing to say that a deeply disturbed and dangerous person may seek out violent pornography to fulfil their deviant fantasies: however it is an entirely different matter to say that normal, well adjusted people will be inspired to commit violent crimes if they watch such images. If we wish to avoid such tragedies happening again, we should take a wider look at how people become so disturbed that they lose the ability to judge right from wrong and commit such atrocities. A debate over whether such pornography is banned or not is therefore a side issue as it does not adequately address this matter.
