Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Rlyss · 04-27-2005, 04:50 AM

It looks like I'm the only one who sees some truth in this article.

I don't think it's as simple as that at all Slavakion. The difference is that getting porn back in those days was difficult (compared to now). If you didn't have to trawl through the attic to find your dad's Playboys then you had to wait until somebody else did and passed them around at school. There was a finite amount of porn, so even if you got addicted to it as the article is saying, if there's none around then you can't do too much about it. Obviously some kids probably had rich friends who seemed to have a never-ending supply, but it doesn't even begin to compare with the amount that's on the internet now, and how easy it is to get. The article even has the paragraph heading "Finding online porn without even trying".

I think what the article is getting at is that in the old days (whenever they were) porn was around and kids were curious, but that it was so much more difficult to get addicted, as the kid in the article certainly is. Sure he's an extreme example but it's really not too far fetched and I don't think many kids are that far behind him.

I also don't see how people can claim that isn't addiction. We can become addicted to drugs and gambling but not pornography? It looks like there are more and more studies showing the chemical changes occuring in the brain, and people admitting that they can't get off on what used to satisfy them. Aren't they signs of addiction? " Brooks defines addiction as "a compulsive inability to not do it and the need to continually reach new levels of eroticism."

I've got no problem with porn at all, but sometimes I do get the feeling that parts of society are sick of sexuality's negative image (or of porn being shameful etc.), and the claims that it's natural and should be embraced and more acknowledged and talked about are getting louder. I wonder if that leads to things like this, where a kid who is seems to me to be addicted is defended (or the blame is shifted to his parents) because we want so badly for porn to be accepted. Of course, these are extremes, but so is this kid.

I don't think there is ever going to be a clear link between viewing porn and commiting rape, but the sentences ""I knew what they looked like without clothes on and wanted to have sex with them. I couldn't turn it off," he said." and "Georgette Constantinou, a pediatric psychologist at Akron Children's Hospital, said viewing pornography at that age "puts boys into a constant hyper-sexualized state" worried me. Of course all teenage boys are full of beans anyway, but the fact that viewing porn apparently doesn't quell those feelings and satisfy them makes me wonder how long it might take for pornography alone to become boring.

04-27-2005, 04:50 AM	#10 (permalink)
Rlyss The Pusher Location: Edinburgh	It looks like I'm the only one who sees some truth in this article. I don't think it's as simple as that at all Slavakion. The difference is that getting porn back in those days was difficult (compared to now). If you didn't have to trawl through the attic to find your dad's Playboys then you had to wait until somebody else did and passed them around at school. There was a finite amount of porn, so even if you got addicted to it as the article is saying, if there's none around then you can't do too much about it. Obviously some kids probably had rich friends who seemed to have a never-ending supply, but it doesn't even begin to compare with the amount that's on the internet now, and how easy it is to get. The article even has the paragraph heading "Finding online porn without even trying". I think what the article is getting at is that in the old days (whenever they were) porn was around and kids were curious, but that it was so much more difficult to get addicted, as the kid in the article certainly is. Sure he's an extreme example but it's really not too far fetched and I don't think many kids are that far behind him. I also don't see how people can claim that isn't addiction. We can become addicted to drugs and gambling but not pornography? It looks like there are more and more studies showing the chemical changes occuring in the brain, and people admitting that they can't get off on what used to satisfy them. Aren't they signs of addiction? " Brooks defines addiction as "a compulsive inability to not do it and the need to continually reach new levels of eroticism." I've got no problem with porn at all, but sometimes I do get the feeling that parts of society are sick of sexuality's negative image (or of porn being shameful etc.), and the claims that it's natural and should be embraced and more acknowledged and talked about are getting louder. I wonder if that leads to things like this, where a kid who is seems to me to be addicted is defended (or the blame is shifted to his parents) because we want so badly for porn to be accepted. Of course, these are extremes, but so is this kid. I don't think there is ever going to be a clear link between viewing porn and commiting rape, but the sentences ""I knew what they looked like without clothes on and wanted to have sex with them. I couldn't turn it off," he said." and "Georgette Constantinou, a pediatric psychologist at Akron Children's Hospital, said viewing pornography at that age "puts boys into a constant hyper-sexualized state" worried me. Of course all teenage boys are full of beans anyway, but the fact that viewing porn apparently doesn't quell those feelings and satisfy them makes me wonder how long it might take for pornography alone to become boring.