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.

Ok....

So how many of them have ever visited 4chan?

Edit: Because if they have, that right there explains how they saw those pics/gifs/vids....

Seems like we've gone way off topic...but okay, since we're just having a conversation. Instead of thinking about what defines morality or redundantly trying to correct other peoples statements when you should have and could have easily assumed that the person you were correcting had already known but left out what you wrote. Lets go with facts instead of ideals. What are morals in the reality of society? It is a set of written or unwritten but always assumed set of rules/values that holds a place of worth in a community. But then again, that is just a vague definition. More often then not, morals of any standard are set by people in place of power. Values are often forced on the conquered and low classes of society because it is the ones on top who get to choose the worth of pretty much everything. Based on facts, on the actions written in history, that is what morals are. But of course, we still have the right to argue what defines morality.

Edit: And btw, data suggests that pornography has been around since the ancient egyptians. But thats only because we have evidence due to the egyptians knowing the importance of keeping records. Knowledge is power. Of course it isn't really called pornography nor did the egyptians percieve it the same way we do so today due to them having different "morals". But I personally assume that "pornography" goes back longer than the egyptians. It would be foolish to assume something isn't there just because you don't see it.

Pornography is not bad at all as far as I can tell but excessive masturbation can lead to health problems so you know just have some moderation...

jgehunter wrote:Pornography is not bad at all as far as I can tell but excessive masturbation can lead to health problems so you know just have some moderation...

I've heard this, but what problems is it supposed to lead to?

Sex can lead to a snapped penis so perhaps masturbations associated health problems are safer

Palindrome wrote:There are two questions here.

Is porn actually harmful to 'children'? I doesn't seem likely to me (depending on the type of porn obviously).

I don't know

going through puberty I really only had a few choices

Sailormoon on Toonami, Trish Stratus images posters or magazines or underwear ads from the sears catalog (least favorable).

Going through puberty was a painful lonely time.

Piston Honda wrote:

Palindrome wrote:There are two questions here.

Is porn actually harmful to 'children'? I doesn't seem likely to me (depending on the type of porn obviously).

I don't know

going through puberty I really only had a few choices

Sailormoon on Toonami, Trish Stratus images posters or magazines or underwear ads from the sears catalog (least favorable).

Going through puberty was a painful lonely time.

I never quite sank as low as Sailor Moon (thank goodness for small blessings), but underwear ads and I were quite well-acquainted in my teenage years. After all, who had time to wait for dial-up to get to the good stuff?

grayshadow87 wrote:[

I never quite sank as low as Sailor Moon (thank goodness for small blessings), but underwear ads and I were quite well-acquainted in my teenage years. After all, who had time to wait for dial-up to get to the good stuff?

Only computer we had was in the den so no privacy for fap time.

High school was worse. No dating life. Being the only virgin on the football team and not talking about sex in the locker room and having pictures of pro wrestlers in my locker kind spread rumors around.

I take comfort in seeing all those bastards miserable working at Wal Mart, McDonalds, all fat, pregnant or having a bunch of bratty kids.

Goddamn kids today are so spoiled it kills me. 4 out 5 teenagers are addicted to internet porn? When I was a kid, there was no internet, let alone internet porn.

When I was a kid, the best spank material we could summon was National Geographics from the library. And we had to walk there 20 miles in the snow, uphill both ways, with no shoes. That's how life was in the dark days of the early 90's.

Deathshead420 wrote:Not to intrude too much into the ethics debate but I wonder if the kids growing up with unlimited free net porn will have a long term impact on sexual predators?

If most predators back in the day could just sit home and fap to hentai, would they be so eager to go out and commit crimes?

Or does the sick gene still need to manifest it self in a real world situation?

Access to outlets has been shown to decrease some instances, while exacerbating others. Ultimately, it makes no difference to the overall numbers.



@SirLynchMob: There is no morality that you cannot place into one of those three categories: Utilitarian, Kantian or Virtue Ethics. Everything else winds up being somewhat derivative of one or more of these options.

Utilitarian Ethics = right and wrong are determined by the principle of maximizing pleasure while minimizing pain. (changes to worldview can alter the calculation)
Kantian Ethics = God determines what is right and wrong. (or some other significantly superior entity)
Virtue Ethics = The pursuit of "arete", amongst a subscription to a predetermined set of desirable traits. (the most flawed of the theories, it makes no distinction of how those traits are determined or ranked)

azazel the cat wrote:

Deathshead420 wrote:Not to intrude too much into the ethics debate but I wonder if the kids growing up with unlimited free net porn will have a long term impact on sexual predators?

If most predators back in the day could just sit home and fap to hentai, would they be so eager to go out and commit crimes?

Or does the sick gene still need to manifest it self in a real world situation?

Access to outlets has been shown to decrease some instances, while exacerbating others. Ultimately, it makes no difference to the overall numbers.



@SirLynchMob: There is no morality that you cannot place into one of those three categories: Utilitarian, Kantian or Virtue Ethics. Everything else winds up being somewhat derivative of one or more of these options.

Utilitarian Ethics = right and wrong are determined by the principle of maximizing pleasure while minimizing pain. (changes to worldview can alter the calculation)
Kantian Ethics = God determines what is right and wrong. (or some other significantly superior entity)
Virtue Ethics = The pursuit of "arete", amongst a subscription to a predetermined set of desirable traits. (the most flawed of the theories, it makes no distinction of how those traits are determined or ranked)

I know that. But what happens is, people take a label with no moral qualities, like republican, and assign it a moral quality, immoral. so if I get enough people to agree with me that republicans are immoral, then everyone starts seeing republican as a moral issue. When in reality its just not a moral position, its just a position.

Bullockist wrote:Sex can lead to a snapped penis so perhaps masturbations associated health problems are safer

Such as RSI or, depending on your technique, whiplash!

Ouze wrote:Goddamn kids today are so spoiled it kills me. 4 out 5 teenagers are addicted to internet porn? When I was a kid, there was no internet, let alone internet porn.

When I was a kid, the best spank material we could summon was National Geographics from the library. And we had to walk there 20 miles in the snow, uphill both ways, with no shoes. That's how life was in the dark days of the early 90's.

Hey there was internet, but only the rich kids had it. And they always stopped inviting you over once you whipped it out in their living room...............rich A-holes and their fancy computers

Is it just me, or is it odd that you can have sex at 16, but can't watch porn until 18?

Squigsquasher wrote:Is it just me, or is it odd that you can have sex at 16, but can't watch porn until 18?

It is so you don't get any ideas... and/or can properly appreciate the porn when you get to 18

It is odd that in NY state 17 yr olds can have sex, but if one of them sends a naked pic to the other, they can be arrested. Apparently, the picture is more damaging, shared between a couple, than sex is. Somebody didn't think this out well...pictures don't cause pregnancy or STDs (usually). Age of legal sex and age of nude pictures should be the same.

That's something that's always confused me, and I've yet to hear a decent explaination for it... maybe there isn't one?

How is it hard to understand that creating illegal pornography is different than having sex?

Not creating necessarily, but viewing... although, put like that... ^
My thoughts were that If you're old enough to do It, surely you're old enough to watch it done?

But then, as a teenage guy I'm biased all the way to hell on this one

Manchu wrote:How is it hard to understand that creating illegal pornography is different than having sex?

Just because it's illegal doesn't mean it's bad.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:

Manchu wrote:How is it hard to understand that creating illegal pornography is different than having sex?

Just because it's illegal doesn't mean it's bad.

Although rulers, dictators, and all forms of governmental bodies would give alot to have you think that

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:

Manchu wrote:How is it hard to understand that creating illegal pornography is different than having sex?

Just because it's illegal doesn't mean it's bad.

The converse of this statement is equally true.

Both are so vague as to be pretty much pointless to even say.

Things like the current discussion is just proof in how ill equipped the law is in our modern world. Im sure when the laws were made that allowed 16/17 y/o to have consensual sex, we didnt have house phones that fit in our pockets, and take anywhere, that has instant access to the internet with video capturing tech in it.



But our law makers would rather argue over stupid things, like why are certain musical artists "bad" and why video games cause people to rape and murder one another

KingCracker wrote:Things like the current discussion is just proof in how ill equipped the law is in our modern world. Im sure when the laws were made that allowed 16/17 y/o to have consensual sex, we didnt have house phones that fit in our pockets, and take anywhere, that has instant access to the internet with video capturing tech in it.

But our law makers would rather argue over stupid things, like why are certain musical artists "bad" and why video games cause people to rape and murder one another

Yeah, we never thought that we'd have that type of technology nor that it would be used for such purposes by teenagers or criminals to make under-aged pornography. But then again, 100 years back, marrying at the age of 16 or 17 was pretty normal. You or your family would have been looking for a suitable mate for you by the time you were 14...sometimes earlier. So, bearing with the fact that it was viewed as pretty ordinary for two people to wed at that age back then, the law is pretty accurate based on historic facts. We can't foresee the future though, so the laws on current standards would always be behind by one step.

Case in point, Gay marriage and Gay rights. When my dad was a kid, homosexuality was seen as a mental disorder.

Monster Rain wrote:

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote:

Manchu wrote:How is it hard to understand that creating illegal pornography is different than having sex?

Just because it's illegal doesn't mean it's bad.

The converse of this statement is equally true.

Both are so vague as to be pretty much pointless to even say.

As a counterpoint given context it isn't very vague really. Thanks for nitpicking though

And the majority of people I knew in my younger life still believe homosexuality is a mental disorder. Ones I meet now, not so much.

I don't think sex becoming more normal is going to cause some Eldar-esque psychic explosion. Teenagers swapping pics then learning what shame is early so they avoid mistakes later in life might just be normal now. If anything we should be teaching them to make sure and leave their faces out of them, or how to get pics without having to send any. Or that they can send random pics they find on the internet instead of theirs so they're not actually at risk. I should teach health class.

kitch102 wrote:

Bullockist wrote:Sex can lead to a snapped penis so perhaps masturbations associated health problems are safer

Such as RSI or, depending on your technique, whiplash!

I know someone whos Granddad bent his penis during sex...... at 90 degrees....

^thats... Nice to know.

Cannerus_The_Unbearable wrote: I don't think sex becoming more normal is going to cause some Eldar-esque psychic explosion.

Damn, there goes my master plan.

I see this sort of stuff in my school. I do think it's unhealthy, for many complicated reasons. Unfettered access to hardcore pornography distorts kid's expectations and attitudes.

The whole sending naked pictures thing is also distressing- teenage boys are absolute scumbags about this sort of thing, any girl who puts an even remotely revealing picture out there is sure to be on everyone's smart phone within a couple of days. Even if they leave their face out of it, it is quickly uploaded to a social network and tagged, so everyone knows who it is. Gossip and scandal moves at lightning speed through the school and kids viciously pile on to the despised in their peer group via twitter etc.
I'm sure it will balance out, with time, but I have no illusions that it's not harmful.