Peer Pressure Porn Filter 1051
Highwayman writes "Wired magazine presents one man's approach to stopping online pr0n 'Instead of relying on filters, the approach, which NetAccountability has been pitching primarily to religious groups, calls for Web users to share records of their online activity. Users pick a friend, spouse or other confidant who receives a regular report showing which sites they visit, highlighting potentially objectionable material.'"
yeah, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Big Difference (Score:5, Insightful)
I was just about to post this same thought, and I noticed you beat me to it. There is a huge difference between people who are trying to monitor and clean up their own online surfing habits (for whatever reasons) and what the headline and story description said.
This is just a way for people to keep them accountable in a way described in the Bible. Of course, knowing Slashdot, this will be made fun of to no end. People attempting to live their lives according to an external and somewhat objective standard is just so medieval.
Dumbest thing I've seen in a long time... (Score:2, Insightful)
First, the whole "my religion doesn't allow me to look at porn" argument is just nuts. If you truly believe this, you won't need your big brother (or whomever) to watch you.
Second, what about self control? Okay, you don't want to look at porn. So the only way you can stop is to have your PC report which sites you visit to Grandma?
Finally, if you want to look at porn, look at porn. If your religion forbids it, well, that sucks... but otherwise, who the hell cares if you look at porn? I enjoy it, am not ashamed of it, and I certainly don't need anyone else (or any religion) scrutinizing what sites I visit.
So next we'll be CCing our Visa bill to someone, to curb excessive spending; faxing the grocery list/receipt to help with over-eating; and so on. Do these people actually need a babysitter? If so, what are they doing living on their own, let alone surfing the 'Net without supervision?
accountability? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Religious Groups (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm beginning to find that half of my posts have the following question, but I'll ask it anyway:
Did you read the article?
This is about people who voluntarily are wishing to help clean up their own surfing because of a moral code they wish to live by. Why do you say they are "judging others"? They are judging themselves. Yes, they are getting help from others who have that same moral code, but that is exactly what the Bible tells these people to do. Don't turn this into something it's not.
self-censorship! yayness. (Score:3, Insightful)
Seems like when we're online, sometimes self-awareness goes out the window. Nothing new to most of us, but I think we'd all be shocked at how much time we actively spend online, where we go, that sort of thing. Bring it on.
Re:Invasion of Privacy (Score:2, Insightful)
How does this account for snail mail? (Score:0, Insightful)
Who's to stop you from picking up a couple of mags at a 7-11 on your way home from work? Who's to stop you from checking out the adult novelty shop? Or a stripbar? Or an that hottie from the other department? Or a crackwhore with HIV?
Sexual repression will just lead to real problems. If people want to get there kicks off on the net, then whats the big deal? You can't get pregnant or diseased from the net. The worst I can see is a high VISA bill or maybe, but unlikely, an online text-based affair.
This just seems like another halfassed scheme to profit off of morality freaks to me.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:yeah, but... (Score:1, Insightful)
Even better... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Dumbest thing I've seen in a long time... (Score:5, Insightful)
And about the decision personal or religious not to look at porn... a lot of people's wives arent' too fond of their husbands looking at the stuff.
Re:This makes one HUGE assumption... (Score:4, Insightful)
If you don't want to stop pornography addictions, don't use these types of services.
It isn't like someone is forcing you do do this.
robi
Re:Dumbest thing I've seen in a long time... (Score:4, Insightful)
Typical Responses (Score:5, Insightful)
It is not invasion of privacy if you install it on purpose.
It is not religious judgement of others if people use tools that monitor their own activity.
This is an example of someone having an idea that ought to be welcome here. Rather than removing choices or limiting activity- people are given new choices to use if they so wish.
Those of you who think pornography cannot be destructive are unaware of the fact that it can ruin some peoples lives. If they want help with that- what is the harm?
Re:Religious Groups (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Big Difference (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Crazy (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't see belonging to peer-accountibility group as the article mentions as calling for a defacto label of 'unhealthy'. In fact I'd call it the opposite. Someone who sees a behaviour they deem as self-negative and takes steps to correct/modify that behaviour without imposing their own standard on the rest of society is probably more healthy (IMHO) than many of the rest of us.
Re:Yes, this is so cool (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Big Difference (Score:3, Insightful)
Just because Christians *claim* it's objective doesn't mean it is.
Re:It will *never* work (Score:2, Insightful)
This will work - depending on the sincerity of the person using it. If they choose people close to them - who share similar values - they it will work to the extent of their value system. If they choose Joe Blow from church of the whatever who believe that women are from the devil, then yes it will fail. But if they choose someone from their peer group that they trust and know shares similar values as they do, the it will work to the level they choose it to.
Is the Slashdot crowd anti-morality? (Score:5, Insightful)
I myself meet on a regular basis with other men who share a similar code-of-ethics - we hold each other accountable, voluntarily, as a check on our own behavior. In case no one's noticed, we human's don't do so well with the self control thing. The internet can consume much of our time, and I'm somewhat relieved to see others making an effort to cognatively assess and control the impact it has on their lives.
Feel free to lament the things which bind you (hey, I don't like MS either...), but some of you really need to figure out what - if anything - you stand for. I would expect this crowd to at least be capable of supporting an individual's right to overcome adversity they face.
By the way...accountability works. Yes, it's hard to admit to shameful things. And it's harder still to recognize (and admit to) repeating patterns of destructive behavior in one's life. There are a lot of worthwhile things that are hard.
Re:Big Difference (Score:3, Insightful)
> to get men to stop looking at it via shame/peer
> preasure.
And here lies the problem with our society. I certainly might disagree with porn as something that encourages misogynistic views of women. However, trying to guilt-trip people into not viewing it is stupid. It's like trying to scare people into not mastrobating by telling them how it, "will make you blind." It's nice to see for once that someone isn't encouraging judicial level action, but he's still barking up the wrong tree.
It's like trying to stop drug usage in teenagers by saying, "do you know how dissapointed your parents would be in you?" Seriously...instead of trying to scare/bully/shame people into doing something, you have to alter things at a different level.
Instead, you need to alter the way in which women are portrayed in a lot of other areas of life...heck, MTV alone is just as bad as most porn (as it relates to images of women)...
Accountability is Opt-In (Score:5, Insightful)
It is interesting to see everyone getting so indignant about people that have identified someone they think is wrong in their lives (which you can rightfully argue about, but they have made a choice that this is something that they want to work to remove from their lives) and which they are trying to weed out. This is an opt-in choice. No one is forcing a person to sign-up for this service or to receive the reports. This is a free choice between consenting adults.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I know that I have behaviors that I would like to see changed. For some of us these are addictions (sex, porn, alcohol, drugs), for others it is a desire to improve ourselves (spend time with significant people in our lives, exercise, control our tempers better). As various 12 Step programs have shown, and as others knew before them, one of the best ways to do this is to build accountability into our lives.
All this is a high tech version of what happens at an AA meeting or in prayer groups in many churches. People are confessing their "sins" to one another and being encouraged to go out into the world and continue to pursue what they believe is right.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I know that I am not perfect. I am far from it. It would like to see change in my life for the better. I would like to be more regular in working out, focus more attention on my children, give my wife my time, be more attentive to friends, to not procrastinate, etc. I have folks that are my accountability partners. Do I use a system like this? No. But can I see the benefit to some? Yes. If it isn't meaningful or helpful to you, then pass on it. But if it works for the folks in question, then respect them as consenting adults doing something in the privacy of their relationships.
Re:Dumbest thing I've seen in a long time... (Score:3, Insightful)
1) First, the whole "my religion doesn't allow me to look at porn" argument is just nuts. If you truly believe this, you won't need your big brother (or whomever) to watch you.
There are two schools involved. The ones who hold deep spiritual beliefs, and as you said, do not need any help living by their beliefs. These are admittedly rare. There are alos others who are merely using that line as an excuse and do actually, as others pointed out, lack the fundamental willpower to stop.
2) Self Control
Discipline is one of the most complex, and difficult, lessons any of us learn. It is very difficult to deny anyone, let alone one's self, something pleasurable. We are fighting eons of evolution (or out nature by Creation) in so doing. This is what makes the religious dictates a challenge to follow. Discipline requires us to fight an enemy always our equal, ourself.
3) Don't want to
Generally, those who do not want to, don't. Those who vocalize that they do not want to and yet continue are facing the challenge of #2, discipline of the mind over the instinct.
While I support other's right not to view things they find objectionable, I do not support anyone attempting to impose that on someone else. If you ask for help, it should be freely given, and for those who do have trouble in the self conflict, this is a good idea. However, no one should force that help on another.
The use of religion, or morality, to impose limitations from one person or group to another has caused (and may soon cause) more and bloodier wars than just about anything else.
Re:Big Difference (Score:2, Insightful)
The teachings/stories of the Bible are well below my moral standards, so I'd rather not use that as a source.
In any case, we already have a more current and dynamic system of determining accountability: its called the legal system.
Of course, knowing Slashdot, this will be made fun of to no end.
It's usually because it's frustrating to see so many otherwise intelligent people blindly accept complete bullshit. Look, I'm not trying to start a flame war. If your position isn't based on reason, reason isn't going to change your mind. End of discussion.
People attempting to live their lives according to an external and somewhat objective standard is just so medieval.
I think it's safe to say that most slashdots users don't care who you send your or your child's history list to, as long as you aren't forcing them or their children to do the same.
Re:Dumbest thing I've seen in a long time... (Score:3, Insightful)
Finally, if you want to look at porn, look at porn. If your religion forbids it, well, that sucks...
And that's what the situation is here. It is VOLUNTARY and people are doing this so they are ACCOUNTABLE to their faith.
If you enjoy pr0n and aren't ashamed, then don't use this software! That's a hard one to figure out...
Re:Big Difference (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd think you'd want a convicted sex offender to get off to net porn. Maybe you'd get lucky and he'd be able to keep himself happy that way instead of doing what got him in trouble in the first place. Kinda like the patch...
That is, unless online kiddie porn was his original offense. Then it might be a good idea.
Re:This is a great idea. (Score:0, Insightful)
Re:Big Difference (Score:1, Insightful)
You are looking at "human objectivity"... in nearly all areas, the Bible is quite clear. With regard to pornography, how many ways can you contrue Matthew 5:28 - "But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart"? Most "brands" as you say are derived from some interpretation from the Bible that is very clearly incorrect. Like it or not, the Bible provides an excellent moral standard.
this only works if your partner puts in the time (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:It will *never* work (Score:3, Insightful)
I should have elaborated on this point as being one of the reasons why it won't work. In fact,I think the Bible has some verse about this, "blind leading the blind". Basically I get to pick my judge! Where would the conflict come in? If I was secretly addicted to porn, all I would need to do is pick some young unmarried man to be my peer reviewer. Odds are if he's staying celibate he's got to be dipping in the porn fountain, especially if he's good with computers.
Meanwhile Mrs. Chastity Witheredpuss will have one of the ladies from her sewing circle monitor her Internet habits...but since it's pretty much all just aol.com there's nothing scandalous to report.
Now, if your browsing habits were broadcast to a number of people, or people that you didn't choose, that would be something intimidating enough to perhaps prevent you from viewing porn. But as I said, nobody in their right mind would open this can of worms.
The only people I could see this helping are people who confess they are addicted to porn and are asking for peer review because they want help in avoiding temptation. But all it would probably do in this case is return them back to movies, magazines, and other non-trackable porn.
All in all, still a worthless idea.
- JoeShmoe
.
Re:yeah, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it's the religion that does that. The pr0n just makes you feel horny.
"Finally, consider that a great deal of the women invloved in the porn industry have histories of sexual abuse, and the emotioanl problems that entails... do you really want to take advantage of that situation for a few moments of pleasure?"
And so do a lot of the women who work at McDonald's...doesn't mean you have to stop eating there. Can't it just be possible that some of them LIKE getting paid for having sex? Sounds like a nice job to me. I've known a few women involved in the sex industry at one time or another during their lives who had no history of abuse or what-have-you, never used drugs, and all in all had a good time and made an obscene amount of money. Paying their way through college, actually.
Re:yeah, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you have been watching too much "Sex in the City". My wife and I regularly enjoy pornography *together* and I sincerly doubt that it has any potential to ruin our marriage.
Dissappointing (Score:4, Insightful)
This could be a great opportunity for understanding and discussion. Istead, the slashdot community has latched on to the combined theme of religion and pornography and has used the opportunity to heap derision and ridicule on a group of people simply because they think differently.
It seems rather hypocritical to demand tolerance for your own personal views and then in turn refuse to tolerate views other than your own.
Now for an actual comment on the story: I would say this idea boils down to obtaining self-control by making all of your private actions public. I think such an approach can be viewed as only a means to an end, because as a final solution it is fundamentally flawed. This is because true self-control is the thing that is manifested when nobody else is looking. True self-control must ultimately come from within.
Re:Typical Responses (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know where you're getting this idea that people object to it because it's an invasion of privacy, or some sort of assault on freedom. I haven't seen any posts that claim that. Perhaps that's an easy argument you can assume everyone has, and then easily dismiss it. To me the problem is it seems kinda creepy that you'd need the threat of shame from your friends or family to not do something you consider morally abhorent. I'd suggest to people like this that they either truly believe what their religion says, or get a different religion. There's so many brands these days, I'm sure you can find one that suits you better.
Re:Even better... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Big Difference (Score:5, Insightful)
What a standard
Re:It will *never* work (Score:4, Insightful)
Which is exactly why something like this will work, but a centralized "don't let them see this it's dirty" filtering system won't.
These programs email your suriong habits to a friend or pastor, someone who knows you and can agree on what you should and should not be looking for. For example, someone shopping for a valentine's gift for his wife would have a fairly good reason for visiting victoria's secret, but an unmarried man wouldn't.
These programs are about defining your own standards, and having someone help you hold to them.
My pastors actually say that something can be sinful for one person and not another. If a man has a problem with violence, he shouldn't be watching violent movies, but for a man without that problem, the Matrix is nothing but a fun movie. For a man with an alcohol addiction, a glass of wine is a bad idea, but for a man without that problem, it's simply something that goes well with the fish.
We're anti-idiocy (Score:2, Insightful)
We belittle the mans attempt not to improve himself, but his attempt to suggest that the rest of the world need this to improve. That's just typical Christian hybris. If he cannot control himself not to look at porn then he might have a real problem, but the problem isn't really with porn, or even the world wide web, the problem is much more _fundamental_ than that, if you get my drift.
Stuff like what you put in the subject is exactly what we oppose, the belief that there is some sort of absolute morality and that those who look at porn and can handle it (and enjoy it!) are actually _bad_, when in fact they are not.
Re:Big Difference (Score:5, Insightful)
in nearly all areas, the Bible is quite clear. Like it or not, the Bible provides an excellent moral standard.
Dear Dr. Laura:
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When people try to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to follow them:
a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev.1:9).The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7.In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanness (Lev.15:19-24).The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
d) Lev.25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?
f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev.11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?
g) Lev.21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?
h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?
i) I know from Lev.11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev.19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread cotton/polyester blend. He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them (Lev.24:10-16)? Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev.20:14)
I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.
Re:yeah, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, that's religion and imposed societal morals that lead to those negative feelings. They want to stop because religion/society says it is bad, but the body enjoys it and really wants it.
Have you ever bought a product produced in a third-world country? Lots of things, right? How can you live with yourself? Don't you know about how workers are mistreated?
Re:Big Difference (Score:2, Insightful)
So gay porn's okay for men then? And women, they can look at pretty much anything they want?
Before you start getting annoyed and saying "Well, obviously, you're being clearly incorrect, by virtue of being to too narrowly literal. The meaning of 5:28 is clearly inferred," consider that you are basicially making an appeal to "human objectivity."
Any act of inferrel is *not* purely objective. It may be right, but it's not purely derived from the text, you have use your human smarts to make decisions about the context and so on -- decisions which can be influenced by bias, concious or unconcious, or how well informed you are about the historical contexts in which the passage was written and subsequently translated (i.e. making a guess that at the time the passage entered into English, people used the term "man" to refers to humans regardless of gender, whereas many people today would more likely to use the term "person"). All of which contains the possibility of error.
Either the Bible is taken literally -- in which case, I would point out that even beyond my questions above, the passage says nothing about looking at photographs of women, but just looking at women (they're two different things, as anyone who's tried to cuddle up with a copy of Playboy can tell you) -- or the bible is not taken literally, in which case, while it may give excellent moral *guidance*, it still must be interpreted. The original poster's point holds, alas.
Re:yeah, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
If you could, you'd be so turned on right now....
"And I'm not suggesting that it isn't stimulating or gratifying; simply that it violates the emotional contract of marriage."
But that's a crock and a half. You're essentially saying that his marriage is invalid becuase it doesn't agree with your idea of what marriage should be. I'd say that an open sexual relationship where both partners actually feel gratified is far more fundamental to the success of a relationship than the approval of strangers such as yourself, or myself for that matter. Neither you nor I have any right to judge as illlegitimate something that holds their relationship together. As a matter of fact, my opinion would be that a relationship based on repressed emotions and desires is inherently less stable and emotionally fulfilling than one that is based on open communication, including but not limited to communication about and fulfillment of sexual desires. So if I were to apply your "my way is the only way" mentality, his relationship is far more legitimate as a marriage than yours, because it's honest. How's that feel?
Re:yeah, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, that's one view. Another view is that human sexuality is nothing to be ashamed of. We all have different views on what things are shameful and what things are not, I happen to think that it is shamful to use guilt as a weapon, while only backing it up with a book of words that man put into God's mouth.
One of the best, if not only, ways of dealing with lust is to stop feeding it. The internet makes it very easy to feed lust; this makes it much easier to resist it.
Here you have made the leap from saying that some people think that lust is bad, to stating it as fact, by implying that lust is an addiction that is fed by the internet. I do not agree that lust is bad, nor do I agree that common availability of pron on the internet will typically lead to an unmanagable addiction.
Secondly, take a walk through google sometime and look for the various studies on porn and psychology. Pornography addictions tend to create feelings of unworthiness, self-hatred, "dirtiness," etc.
Feelings of unworthiness, self-hatred, "dirtiness," etc. are, in my view, caused by man attempting to control his fellow man by putting words into God's mouth that God did not say.
I've talked with seveal women who found out that their husbands were using, or even addicted to, pornography. To the person, they felt that they were not attractive enough to please their husbands, that they had done something wrong, that they couldn't trust their spouse... pornography has the potential to do great harm to an otherwise healthy marriage.
Is a marrage healthy if its foundation is based on an insecure body image and Church fostered shame for all things sexual? I agree that such feelings are valid, but disagree on the root cause.
Finally, consider that a great deal of the women invloved in the porn industry have histories of sexual abuse, and the emotioanl problems that entails... do you really want to take advantage of that situation for a few moments of pleasure?
All work is exploitation. I agree that the sex industry contains some of the most horrid working conditions there are, but no more so than any other industry that is as free from regulation. Nothing that better OSHA oversight, and some labor organizing can't fix.
Re:Big Difference (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, to present my side of this argument: Jesus, in the Sermon on the Mount, was using a number of rhetorical devices which when taken in the context of the whole speech clearly indicate, not a rigid hierarchy of right and wrong, but that what is important for humans is that they simply trust in God. Sadly, some of those statements, when deprived of both context and the nuance of delivery, appear to be some new set of even stricter rules-- the very thing Jesus was arguing against!!
Re:Is the Slashdot crowd anti-morality? (Score:5, Insightful)
To the tune of $3.95 a month.
The guy's trying to profit from other people's "weaknesses" and deserves all the contempt which is thrown at him.
Re:yeah, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually, the best way to deal with "lust" is to find a healthy, nondestructive way to satiate it. Recent events in the Catholic Church show that trying to ignore lust and hoping it goes away only lead to problems later on.
Secondly, take a walk through google sometime and look for the various studies on porn and psychology. Pornography addictions tend to create feelings of unworthiness, self-hatred, "dirtiness," etc.
No, those feelings are caused by religions that rail against pornography.
Also, consider the emotional and relationship issues. I've talked with seveal women who found out that their husbands were using, or even addicted to, pornography. To the person, they felt that they were not attractive enough to please their husbands, that they had done something wrong, that they couldn't trust their spouse... pornography has the potential to do great harm to an otherwise healthy marriage.
That's not pornography, that's mistrust and a lack of communication in marriage. If a husband is spending all his time looking at porn without his wife knowing about it, that's a trust issue. There are many couples who use pornography together to enhance their intimacy and their sex lives. The reason it works is because the couple is open and honest with each other.
Finally, consider that a great deal of the women invloved in the porn industry have histories of sexual abuse, and the emotioanl problems that entails... do you really want to take advantage of that situation for a few moments of pleasure?
There are women with histories of sexual abuse in any industry. I have yet to see any non-anecdotal evidence that the problem is worse in the porn industry than in any other. Furthermore, even if there were a higher incidence of sexual abuse in the porn industry, that still wouldn't prove that porn per se is bad, only that the porn industry had some bad people in it.
Re:What a stupid article (Score:5, Insightful)
It happens quite often really. I would pay for it. Now granted, most people that I know that would use such a service volentarily are christians who struggle with pr0n (such as myself).
Re:Yes, this is so cool (Score:5, Insightful)
If you are a legal adult then you don't have to comply.
If your wife wants you to install it, then the real question is why? Is there some agreement that you will never look at pr0n? If you agree, then you should respect your agreement. Or be clear that you no longer intend to keep this agreement to be pr0n free.
If your parents want you to install it, and you are a legal adult, then frankly, it is none of their business.
If you are not a legal adult, then what are the parent's motivations? To keep you pr0n free? Good luck. This may come as a shock to the parents, but once a guy is in his mid teens, he is naturally interested in sex. Are the parents trying to suppress this? Or out of touch with the fact of it? The realistic parents would probably feel about pr0n much like they would about masturbation. Do it in your own room please. Don't have your very own computer? Then do it when nobody else is home.
If the parents really think they are entitled to control how you think then there are deeper problems, and this request for monitored surfing is just a symptom of the problem, not the problem itself. (Assuming a near-adult, not a child.) In this case, you may just be stuck with unreasonable behavior motivated by good intentions until you are an adult.
As for females, I simply don't know. I'm not one. And I make a point to stay away from them. Still, some of the above thinking might still apply. It is possible that some females, for some reason might take an interest in sex. Should they be able to masturbate privately? (If they do so at all? I'm not female and can't speak with any experience.) If masturbation is okay, then should they be able to view pr0n privately? Once they are in the real world, they can do what they wish. They should not be so sheltered from real life that they can't cope.
On a slightly different subject, yes you can find things on the internet that are shocking, disturbing, etc. Of course, to a limited extend, this is true of TV as well. (Violence, etc. until you get de-sensitized to it) So should people be "protected" from seeing the web's content? Surely with the click of the mouse, even a teenager has the necessary power to dismiss and not see sick #$*@ that they don't want to see.
What are people objecting to, really? (Score:2, Insightful)
1. Cynical that it will work
2. Believe that the guilt caused by pr0n is wrong
3. Think this could be very bad if forced on someone via peer pressure or possibly some big-brother enforced government regulation.
To the people that object based on reasoning #1, I say, that's fine, but something that's got 10,000 people signing up for 4 bucks a month must do SOMETHING for them. The very fact that so many people in the
To the people that object to the guilt brought on by pr0n, that's a matter of opinion. Vegetarians obviously are going feel guilty for eating meat. Conservative Christians are going to feel the same way about pr0n. Whatever your view is, you must allow each person the freedom to be conditioned to have that response if it is their choice.
Personally, I think the third category of objections is most legitimate. Is it possible that people will use this as a way to force something on others? Probably. But just because it can be used in an evil manner does not mean that it is evil in of itself. One computer may be used to make a virus, another to solve a traffic problem. The problem isn't the computer, it's the person who uses it. I think it's the same case here.
Re:Big Difference (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:In a Christian Marriage... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:yeah, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
You bring up a lot of good points; but there're two in particular I'd like to address:
Secondly, take a walk through google sometime and look for the various studies on porn and psychology. Pornography addictions tend to create feelings of unworthiness, self-hatred, "dirtiness," etc. There are many, many people who generally want to stop using pornography, but cannot.
I think you'll find this is true of any addiction, whether it's alcohol, heroin, gambling, pornography, etc. The "dirtiness" comes from realizing one has no control over one's behavior and from feeling guilty about both the lack of control and the moral that "this is bad."
I've talked with seveal women who found out that their husbands were using, or even addicted to, pornography. To the person, they felt that they were not attractive enough to please their husbands, that they had done something wrong, that they couldn't trust their spouse...
I think there are more issues here than just the pornography itself, here. If a man would rather surf porn sites than have the real thing, then there's a real issue - probably one of addiction. And trust issues tend to arise based on a lack of communication, whether pornography is involved or not.
Re:Big Difference (Score:3, Insightful)
Bingo! (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem isn't gun owners, it is the hoods that murder the 7-11 worker to get the cash using guns.
The problem isn't Democracy, it is the politicians that abuse the system, take bribes (soft money), pass biased legislation.
The problem isn't booze, it is getting drunk and driving.
The problem isn't sex, it is addiction to sex/porn with 15 year old drug addicted sex slaves in china.
This community points out so many of these contradictions it makes you wonder if anybody else gets it.
robi
Re: Big Difference (Score:5, Insightful)
> You are looking at "human objectivity"... in nearly all areas, the Bible is quite clear.
Yeah, that's why there are 2,000 Christian sects in the USA, all condemning each other to Hell for misinterpreting the Bible.
Point Loma Nazarene College... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:yeah, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Back to reality: All of those things where you asked "Are you saying..." can be answered by looking at what I was actually saying. Do I think everyone should be able to do anything that feels good? Irrelevant. I'm not talking about everything, just porn-viewing. I think they should be able to enjoy something that is harmless, like look at porn. My point about the guilt coming from morals and religion was to refute the idea that porn viewing inherently makes someone have these negative feelings. That is absurd.
No, those societal morals evolve like anything else of that nature. Many of these societal morals have roots in religion, and in the case of the US, that means Christianity. They change all the time. A hundred years ago, people would have been shocked by the normal clothes teenagers wear (let alone the racy ones), being an independent woman would have been looked down upon, and cocaine would not have been considered a vice. And so on. There are a million things. Many people outwardly say that porn is bad (whether they believe it or not), more and more people publicly admit that they enjoy it. This is a case where it a moral is evolving. And in this case, I think it is for the better.
Actually, I don't "blame" society, because it does not consciously decide what morals will be, since they evolve naturally. But the fallacy of your statement above is "when someone does something wrong feels bad". Looking at porn is only "wrong" in your opinion, and I disagree with it.
Re:This is an excellent idea (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh, I understand it very well, as far as any collective delusion can be understood. I tasted it, educated myself, and then walked away.
Yes?
You can replace pornography with anything above. The key is moderation. I've already acknowledged in my original post that there'll always be a small small percentage that cannot handle $some_random_topic. If you recall, I made the point that a) This isn't very likely to help those who have a real problem and b) This isn't directed at those who have a _real_ problem, this is directed at every "man" out there.
YES! Sheesh. The logical conclusion is that fantasies (you know, the things in your head) are "moral betrayal". If you see a beautiful woman and think of her sexually, then you should feel shame, is that your position? I'm sorry, but I don't understand why it would be "moral betrayal" -- that's just typical moralistic bullshit of the kind one usually get from people whose mind are infected with religion.
I'm saying that if she isn't fine with it, then that is her problem. Her problem is your problem, so you work it out. You deal. Maybe you don't like it when she goes to church, so you decide that you don't get porn and she doesn't get church.
Personally, I couldn't live with a person who didn't at least understand my need for graphic sexuality, and in fact I would much prefer it if she too liked it! Sex and fantasies are so much better when you have someone to share them with :-)
I'm a sexual animal, and I like it. I don't feel ashamed of it at all, and I strongly recent the implication that this is my problem.
I was talking of the person watching porn and then feeling bad about it. Why does he/she feel bad? Why, because he/she has _learned_ that they _should_ feel bad!
I don't think you've even presented any evidence at all that there are some special ramifications to expect, other than one or two people enjoying something in a sexual context. Ohh, sex is BAD?! Oh, I get it... more of that religious moralistic hogwash.
I know something else which can damage a relationship; lying and hiding things for each other, pushing guilt and not giving your partner a personal life.
I think you're seeing the world through glasses with a deep shade of cultural bias.
Here, let me help you; Everything you feel is bad with porn, think "practice religion" instead, and you have something close to my view. Now, do you still feel that, if my partner had that problem, _she_ should be the one to change? If not, then I suggest you're a hypocrite, unless you can provide some very strong evidence that porn is different from other percieved problems.
Re:Big Difference (Score:3, Insightful)
Anything based on morals is inherently subjective.
Mass guilt: Favorite of Stalin, A.H., Dubya (Score:4, Insightful)
It prioritizes mass harrassment over reason.It turns the conflict (much of it natural at a certain age) internally on a person with the added weight of others who are contemptible in choosing to subject others under such pressure because:
1. It is dishones; the "right to look your accuser in the face" is taken away. Anyone looking their accusers in the face will be shamed. Any honest (willing to accept convincing evidence) dialogue is silenced and utterly impossible.
2. It is authority by majority, no accountability of the accusers is taken.
3. It is pressure based on raging fears and mass hysteria. 'Nuff said.
Welcome to Salem, MA 1692.
Re:yeah, but... (Score:1, Insightful)
You know people who have been abused, raped, and had marriages dammaged by porn?
This has nothing to do with porn and everything to do with the attitudes of those that decided it was wrong (read: religious nazis). I suppose all the the women of the tribes you see in National Geographic are raped and abused everyday because they walk around without clothes...
Re:A Note. (Score:5, Insightful)
Are you suggesting that those rapists must have been punished for religious reasons, since all atheists condone pornography?
Or are you suggesting that people who believe in certain moral guidelines are more likely to violate those guidelines than people who don't believe in them? Can someone explain how that makes sense?
Brilliant solution to a non-existent problem. (Score:4, Insightful)
It seems to me that you'll just have a big group of people who will all be watching each other not look at porn. The thing is, they wouldn't be looking at porn in the first place. Oh well, if this will occupy their time and keep them out of everyone else's business then perhaps in the end it will be a positive thing. The more that sexually repressed people and groups are distracted and preoccupied, the happier the rest of the world will be.
I think it is truly sad that anyone even CARES about porn. It is irrelevant to anyone who isn't a pervert, whether you're talking about the perverts who are obsessed with looking at it, or the ones who are obsessed with repressing their own sexual desires (if only they would do it right and stop breeding...). For the rest of us porn is an occasionally interesting distraction and nothing more. I've seen my share of porn and the vast majority of it is completely pointless. I get more out of the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue and a Victoria's Secret catalog than I've ever gotten out of porn. Porn is for adolescent males and males who never grew past adolesence. Even so, that doesn't make it a social problem or something in need of remedy. Unless of course you mean that it needs to be better than it is.
This scheme does nothing but prove that technology gives people new ways to express their stupidity.
Lee
Re:A Note. (Score:5, Insightful)
On a side note, the first time I remember masturbation being mentioned was at a bible study, where we were taught that God disapproved of the practice. The idea had never entered my head before then (I was probably aged about 9 or 10).
To solve the problem once and for all.. (Score:2, Insightful)
That's kind of off topic anyway because I'm not sure exactly what the point of this article is. On the one hand we have the church guilt machine, on the other hand we have porn addicts. Do either of these groups (prudish christians.. hello, that's _so_ victorian era, can anyone say 'sexual revolution happened in the '60s, we're not scared of naked bodies any more' -- or porn addicts) actually install filter software to protect _themselves_? That's kind of mind bogling. Those people have some serious self denile issues.
Re:A Note. (Score:3, Insightful)
Your argument, then, is that the presence of punishment is the causual factor for the creation of rapists, not the porn itself?
Not knowing the incidence of habitual porn viewing among those not convicted of rapes and porn viewing is obviously a missing link--but I think one could just as easily conclude that it would be the consumption of porn to the degree, or of the nature, that warrants punishment, that would be the causual factor in the creation of rapists. To leap to the blame of religion as a "threat to women", um, simply doesn't make a lot of sense.
To satisfy your argument, you would need non-rapists who had viewed porn in the same quantity and quality as those convicted of rapes, but had not been punished for doing so. And your quote simply lacks that data, and so your conclusion is, frankly, off-base. Call me a jesus freak, which I ain't, but it still won't explain the lack of logic.
Re:yeah, but... (Score:2, Insightful)
Marriage has, for thousands of years, a way to ensure that the parental linage can be traced back through history, ie: Bob is the rightful heir to the his father's throne, land, chickens, whatever. The only commitment was to produce an offspring that would tend your farms when you died. It had nothing to do with loving your spouse, that is a relativly modern concept.
Or an incredably old one whose time has come around again. There is some speculation that ancient Egyptions married mostly out of love, could divorce more or less at will, with no stigma to the man, and little (if any) to the women. Sounds like modern day America, actually.
So, for my 2 cents, as long as the people in the relationship agree to it, and one or both are not obsessed with/addicted to it, then there is nothing wrong with having porn in the relationship.
No, it's not the religion. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:BAN INTERNET PORN!??!!!!?!?!? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Mass guilt: Favorite of Stalin, A.H., Dubya (Score:2, Insightful)
1. Shame, well that's one aspect of it. You know, the reason people are installing the software is because they are ashamed of viewing pornography, they aren't ashamed that someone is catching out them in the act. And remember, you install this software voluntarily.
2. You submit the logs of sites to people you choose, not to people you don't know and don't trust. Authority by majority... did you even read how the software is used?
3. Your post is pressure based on raging fears and mass histeria. "Welcome to Salem, MA 1692".
with regards to the pissing match (Score:2, Insightful)
The purpose of Christian life is to bring glory to God.
I know no Christians who'd disagree with me on that...even some of the more fringe groups...Without quoting verses on this and that that seem to specifically address this issue, does viewing porn bring glory to God? not if it's done lustily--if it's done out of appreciation for the female body or whatever (that's a fine line, and one i'd rather not approach) then that could be different, but lust=bad (according to the Bible which I believe in and you may not neccesarily and that's ok). Generally a litmus test is whether you're masturbating in conjunction with the porn. If you are, it's probably (though not neccesarily) lust oriented.
This isn't to keep your kids off of porn. This is for people who desire to stop viewing it and need help--This is a filter for your own computer. It's not a bad thing to help people who want to develop self control develop it.
I'm not suggesting that y'all change your lives to think like me. For the record there was no indoctrination in my case--My parents do not believe what I do. I was not brought up in faith, but found it later (how I believe it should be found--one appreciates where they are more when they had to get there on their own) after THINKING OBJECTIVELY...something many Christians regrettably do not know how to do.
Okay. back to the pissing match. I hate it when that happens.
Brian