Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

LOL nice...you had Dad over the barrel

Thats free enterprise right there.

Melissa: I'm extremely suspicious of most research done in these fields, the stats are just too wobbly to base anything on.

I would say that sexual assault numbers probably wouldn't be effected, and believe it, but I was talking about attitudes, rather than the crimes. I think attitudes are still important.

Palindrome: I dunno man. I was in school in the nineties too, and I'm telling you flat, it's different now. It's substantially different, and kids as young as 11 are very "knowledgeable" and have seen things regularly that would have been practically unheard of for my friends or I at that age. I'm not talking about a smutty magazine or something- I'm talking about violent, degrading, abusive and physically damaging sex scenes. It's definitely my opinion that the industry is skewing towards the "extreme" end.

I'm not a prude. I understand that there's nothing wrong, in most cases, with rough sex or many of the SM practices that people get up to. I think the porn industry is something else entirely though, and I can only say that my experience is that the boys who watch a lot of it and are extremely into it have distressing behaviours when it comes to women, and are quite vocal in expressing their "views". And they don't give a crap if their teacher hears them.

I mean, maybe I should have reported it. I've reported some stuff, when I thought it was very serious, and it gets shrugged off. I've often wondered what would happen if I called a parent to tell them that their son was talking loudly about carrying out abusive sex acts on women. It's a battle I didn't fight (god knows I had enough of them to be fighting), mostly because I couldn't wrap my head around the situation.

If you'd asked me three years ago, I wouldn't have thought any of this, but my experiences have made me a bit more worried about the whole thing.

Mind you, if someone is an adult, I think the chances of porn having a behaviour altering effect that wasn't already there is pretty low. I mean, once you mature, you're generally pretty set in your attitudes and behaviour patterns. Similarly, I see porn addiction as more of a problem with the individual than the pornography- addictive personality types will find something to use as a crutch, whether it's dope, drink or porn.

At least it's not quite as bad as hentai...yet.

It's still pretty bad though. Free access to videos of women being bound, gagged, slapped, gangbanged, etc, aren't something that really need to be accessible to teenagers.

Jihadin wrote:I graduated high school in 1990. I knew better then to hide my Hustler and Playboy magazine under the matress...only had those two...they were hiding in my stack of Boy's Life (Boy Scout magazines)

The irony of this is not lost on me.

If the subject matter of hentai wasn't so fethed up, I would see it as less harmful. At least nobody is actually hurt, infected or given chronic injuries by cartoons.

Sadly, the content tends to be pretty twisted.

It's like the 40k of pornography!

Keep these bastards away from my catgirl yuri pron.

Da Boss wrote:
Melissa: I'm extremely suspicious of most research done in these fields

So, what are you basing your assumptions on?

 Frazzled wrote:

Its all a sidestep. Obama can't run on the economy, or healthcare, or well pretty much anything he's done.

Of course he can run on the economy and healthcare, his approval numbers with respect to both a near enough to 50% for either be perfectly viable given a well constructed campaign. Then he can also run on DADT, the draw down in Iraq, getting Bin Laden, general foreign policy, and a host other things he's done.

Saying that he can' base his platform on achievements from his Presidency is just nonsense that isn't reflected by the available data.

In fact, he IS mentioning the economy, with his argument being that without doing what he did, the economy would have been far, FAR worse.

 dogma wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

Its all a sidestep. Obama can't run on the economy, or healthcare, or well pretty much anything he's done.

Of course he can run on the economy and healthcare, his approval numbers with respect to both a near enough to 50% for either be perfectly viable given a well constructed campaign. Then he can also run on DADT, the draw down in Iraq, getting Bin Laden, general foreign policy, and a host other things he's done.

Saying that he can' base his platform on achievements from his Presidency is just nonsense that isn't reflected by the available data.

of he could run on them, he would be. He's not, so he can't.

That's a dumb argument, because he IS running on them.

Perception I'm getting he's not really running with the economy. Just a lot of Mit bashing.


edit
No cable TV so I'm spared both sides bashing.

Da Boss wrote:

High School isn't what it was, and the discussions, knowledge and attitudes of many of the kids there would really turn your hair white.

Well, unless you've gone to high school in the last 10 years. Hell, I remember plenty of kids losing their virginity in Junior High, and this was in the mid to late 90's before the internet (let alone internet porn) really became mainstream. I would actually say that the majority of the popular girls in my school district had performed some kind of sex act by the age of 13-14 (For boys it tended to happen in the 15-16 range, usually with the aforementioned 13-14 year old girls.) and this was in a relatively affluent, conservative suburb.

 Jihadin wrote:
Perception I'm getting he's not really running with the economy. Just a lot of Mit bashing.

By that definition, neither side is really running on anything other than bashing the other side.

 Frazzled wrote:

of he could run on them, he would be. He's not, so he can't.

As usual you're more concerned with what you want to be true, than what actually is true. Obama has made numerous statements regarding his healthcare plan, and how he believes it will extend coverage to more Americans while also reducing the overall cost of healthcare, and the deficit. He's also released a formal jobs plan, that he has addressed directly in several stump speeches over the last year*.

I mean, this and this are from his campaign website.


*For example, this one in Ohio in June.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Melissia wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Perception I'm getting he's not really running with the economy. Just a lot of Mit bashing.

By that definition, neither side is really running on anything other than bashing the other side.

Yeah, both campaigns have been heavily focused on framing their candidates by comparing them to the opposition, which was largely inevitable given how the past 3 years have been.

Thats not what his advertisements are running. Thats not what all his lacking are talking. lets get real. Its all distraction all the time from Team Obama.

 Frazzled wrote:
Thats not what his advertisements are running. Thats not what all his lacking are talking. lets get real. Its all distraction all the time from Team Obama.

Is that so?













Again, you're more concerned with what you want to be true, than what actually is true.

 dogma wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Thats not what his advertisements are running. Thats not what all his lacking are talking. lets get real. Its all distraction all the time from Team Obama.

Is that so?




.

Man I miss Clinton.

If you don't inhale you're doing it wrong. No wonder he didn't like it.

 dogma wrote:

Da Boss wrote:

High School isn't what it was, and the discussions, knowledge and attitudes of many of the kids there would really turn your hair white.

Well, unless you've gone to high school in the last 10 years. Hell, I remember plenty of kids losing their virginity in Junior High, and this was in the mid to late 90's before the internet (let alone internet porn) really became mainstream. I would actually say that the majority of the popular girls in my school district had performed some kind of sex act by the age of 13-14 (For boys it tended to happen in the 15-16 range, usually with the aforementioned 13-14 year old girls.) and this was in a relatively affluent, conservative suburb.

Much the same with me. Some of the stuff that my peers got up to would have probably made it to the front page of the Sun.

 dogma wrote:
Of course he can run on the economy and healthcare, his approval numbers with respect to both a near enough to 50% for either be perfectly viable given a well constructed campaign. Then he can also run on DADT, the draw down in Iraq, getting Bin Laden, general foreign policy, and a host other things he's done.

Saying that he can' base his platform on achievements from his Presidency is just nonsense that isn't reflected by the available data.

Yeah, I'm getting the impression Fraz assumes he can't run on those things because they're things that Fraz either disapproves of, or doesn't give Obama credit for. What Fraz doesn't realise from there is that his opinion of Obama doesn't matter, because he's never going to vote for Obama or anyone like him. What actually matters is how those things are viewed by the 50 to 60% of people who are likely to vote for a Democratic candidate.

Honestly, I get the impression politics would make a lot more sense to Fraz the second he realised he's a Republican that doesn't like to call himself that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:
of he could run on them, he would be. He's not, so he can't.

Or, more to the point, he could run on them, but won't as long as the Republicans keep throwing up softballs on abortion and other easy win issues for Democrats.

Obama is the incumbent, and he is leading in the polls, and the political geography favours him. This means Romney has to have the discipline within his campaign and his party to stick to issues where he can draw even with Obama. When they keep throwing up other issues, it only makes sense for Obama to play up those issues.

I miss Bill too, am genuinely surprised he did that ad for Obama.

AustonT wrote:I miss Bill too, am genuinely surprised he did that ad for Obama.

Just remember that he's the guy responsible for repealing the greatest safeguard against the current economic crisis.

I don't, I rather disliked what Clinton did in his Presidency....

 Melissia wrote:
I don't, I rather disliked what Clinton did in his Presidency....

He feels your pain.

Good:
-welfare reform
-don't ask don't tell, the first step to where we are now.
-keeping a thumb on Hussein
-actual budgets/worked with the republicans to move us towards no deficit. NO DEFICIT.

Bad:
-Didn't really go after Bin laden
-Kosova war
-started our way towards the mortgage crisis.

I think Clinton actually came really close to capturing Bin Laden.

And you left out a positive: his attempt to institute health care

deleted