the adult film industry has exploitative parts, yes

so shut down those parts

don't stand against the entire industry

there are plenty of men and women who get into it as a empowerment ego rush, or even just because of the money, but never are in a position because they are forced to do something. it's always a freely chosen choice for them

there also naive kids who are tricked into situations which are basically rape and brutality for pennies. so find those assholes and jail them as the shitbags they are

the chinese govt is doing deep packet inspection and going after VPNs now. let's see how hard the politically fearful shitbags get before they realize letting their own people talk freely about politics is a sign of political maturity and social stability, not some evil threat

no, you are indeed making a valid point

i seem to have elicited irrational hysteria in this tool "s.petry"

yeah, you got me, by expressing any sort of sympathy for someone who has a sexual proclivity which places them on a collision course with morality, means i'm also a pedophile /s

fuck you, you smearmongering asswipe

the existence of a progression indicates an impulse which exists independently

the mere creation of a police dept, for example, does not mean martial law is somehow inevitable. this is fear addled ignorance

the slippery slope is a simple logical fallacy like all the others, asking us to trust to fear instead of reason

anyone who depends upon the concept of a slippery slope in the construction of their argument can immediately be dismissed as invalid, unworthy of consideration, and a fearmongering fool

is this the evidence you are referring to?

furthermore there's many different kinds of porn

there is indeed porn which is rape fantasy or porn which treats the woman brutally

there is also porn which is entirely respectful and almost romantic

there is also porn which shows a woman or women treating a man like shit

i submit the type of porn someone chooses is a reflection of their own predilections, so if they gravitate towards porn which subjugates and brutalizes women, that's about their organic character that existed before viewing that kind of porn

if you put me in front of gay porn, made me watch it constantly since a young age, would i be gay? i submit i would be quite bored, and never get aroused, and never become gay

you have one stilted prejudicial view of only one sector of porn, and think it applies to all porn, and you call this "evidence"

you're a troll or a moron on this topic. either way, you fail, and you reneed to rethink your position, it is intellectually invalid

building a police department allows for martial law

are you filled with the same irrational fear and loathing about the existence of police, a completely necessary component for society to function?

Furthermore, I vehemently oppose any moral judgment, moral policing, and censorship.

then you are an immature and naive person. all freedoms have limits. mainly when and where those freedoms impinge on the freedoms of others. my freedom to get a good night's sleep, your freedom to listen to loud music at 2 AM. my freedom to speed on the highway, your freedom to not be killed by a speeding douchebag

there is content, like child porn, whose creation is only possible with the denial of freedom to someone else, a child, who can not consent in an informed way to sex. therefore, censoring child porn is the extension of freedom, not the destruction of it

There is also evidence that a lot of exposure to Porn, especially at a young age is detrimental to brain development, especially respect for women. And that respect for women is one of the key differentiators between an advanced society.

yeah, that's complete laughable nonsense. there is no magic substance in media that creates disrespect. disrespect is a function of a person's low character. putting that on media is a lame attempt at avoiding personal responsibility

i would like to see this "evidence" you refer to, as it sounds like a hilarious pile of crap

there are societies in this world where women are treated legally as little more than property

the west is only beginning to emerge from this barbarity, as "mens rights" morons like yourself illustrate, misogyny still exists

but to answer your scenario:

if a woman is going to try to victimize me, my first defense is a valid judge of character and never getting involved with an evil harpy in the first place

but if i am socially clueless and lack the insight that will protect me from getting invovled with a vile woman, she's going to victimize me anyway, even if she lives in a medieval sharia law society as you somehow believe it should be: poison me, assassinate my character with gossip, harm our children, etc.

there are evil people in this world

some are men. some are women

fight the evil shitbags of the world, not women. not men

to react to the very notion of women's rights as wrong simply marks you as a socially inept loser

i'm sorry your experience with some women has been so bad. but now you're constructing an artificial fantasy about how you interact with the opposite sex that only means you will be forever victimized in the way you fear. it's really only a testament to your weak mental faculties your own poor character

how hard do you think it is for someone who controls all of the circuits to block a webpage?

additionally, we already block, with complete legal and moral legitimacy, child porn sites, phishing sites, etc.

the "infrastructure" you refer to is not really difficult. and in fact already exists for completely valid reasons

so this argument "if we block porn, political opinions are next" is complete slippery slope fear based bullshit

if you want a winning argument, focus on the kind of govt that would do such a thing, not the red herring "oh noes teh infrastruture!" failed weak argument

i would never think a country like britain would fall victim to this sort of censorial nonsense, and it is a troubling development

however, i don't buy the argument it is because of feminism

you need to understand that feminism there is the older valid causes against the maltreatment of women and the removal of their rights. which used to be far worse in the west. and is indeed still a major problem in the world, especially in areas like india and islamic countries

but the kind of feminism you seem to be reacting to isn't really feminism at all, it is instead this sort of clueless teenaged reactive naval gazing by immature clowns

kind of like how dismantling all governmental protections against abuses by large market players is called "libertarianism" in the usa. while actual genuine libertarianism of the original european sort has to do with social issues. real valid libertarians are interested in legalizing marijuana, not freeing plutocrats from paying their fair share of taxes

so like the word "libertarian" in the usa has been hijacked corrupted and rendered invalid by a plutocrat agenda, so to have a few headcases coopted the word "feminist" and advanced truly nutty causes that only mark the believer in those causes as having some sort of psychological or social deficiency

furthermore, for you to react to these fringe idiots, and believe what they stand for is actual feminism, just means you have been horribly trolled. snap out of it, you've been fooled

real, valid feminism is a very important ideology in this world, against the very real and very evil treatment of women in many parts of this world

thank you, that's a valid clarification

i am aware some countries outlaw fantasy cartoon child porn as well as actual real child porn

while real child porn should never be legal and should always be blocked, i think that fantasy drawings and cartoons do have valid cathartic use and should be legal

also, the legal status quo against fantasy content precludes the tactic of honey pots

outlawing the fantasy content drives it underground, while allowing it to flow freely allows the authorities to track profile, and locate consumers of it

as they should

because viewing this material indicates a proclivity that allows us to find pedophiles

and pedophiles should never be able to exist in open society without monitoring

like drug addiction, we should not incarcerate pedophiles, we should treat them as having a healthcare issue. pedophiles, once identified, should be treated, not jailed

and closely watched nonetheless

because like how valid porn between consenting adults does not prevent all rape, only minimize it, fantasy child porn would also only mitigate child abduction and victimization, not prevent all of it

being a pedophile marks you as fundamentally incompatible with human society in a truly horrible way. i feel sorry for pedophiles, i'd rather have painful cancer than be a pedophile, it is a truly life destroying, life hobbling vile affliction

because to be a pedophile means you have a sexual proclivity which immediately elicits the completely valid parental response and societal response to protect their children. some of that instinct outside the realm of law will find immediate and violent impulse, and even large sympathy for that violent impulse. the imperative to protect children is strong, as it should be, and pedophilia is a valid threat. but even in the realm of legality, society has to strongly consider the potential for grave harm that a pedophile represents in open society. a pedophile is truly screwed in many ways, and there is little empathy for them

pedophilia, like homosexuality, is merely a genetic aberration in the formation of sexual attraction. but while homosexuality is fine because it involves consenting adults, pedophilia will never be ok because it involves one party that can never consent (in an informed way, not a bullshit "i gave you toys and candy and you said 'ok' to my suggestion of sex" because a child can never give informed consent on the topic)

i think maybe in the future we can treat pedophilia with child shaped robots

but even so, treatment will never prevent all pedophiles from hurting real children. and therefore society must always view them in a very critical, suspicious, dim light. because they always represent the potential for grave harm

i think if i were a pedophile i'd choose self-banishment to greenland or something. having a strong sense of morality is only a guide, not a cloak of protection, we all have moments of weakness, and i would never want a moment of weakness of mine to result in harm to a child

truly a life-crippling, monstrous affliction

No, it just shows your lack of reading comprehension. Go back and find any mention in my posts of morality. It's OK. I'll wait.

agreed 100%

you have no principles or morality in your "thinking" on the topic. that's the actual point

you have mindless contrarianism where one person can do something evil because somebody else did. and then blame that evil action on someone else anyways, due to your lack of understanding of the concept of accountability

you demonstrate your own personal failures of character rather than any valid commentary on geopolitics. you are projecting choices and consequences as understood by your own dim wattage mind:

1. "somebody did something bad so i should be able to do something bad"

two-wrongs-make-a-right logic

2. "the reason i did something bad is because of what someone else did that does not actually logically imply my action, but whatever"

wife beater logic

your arguments depend upon this "thinking", therefore you mark yourself as an immoral and irresponsible douchebag

i actually feel sorry for anyone who has to work with you or is related to you/ friends with you. you're obviously a horrible piece of shit in the way you think about what is justified or not in this world according to #1 and #2 above

here's some bullshit arguments similar to yours:

"if we legalize marijuana, that means we have to legalize heroin and meth"

"if we legalize gay marriage, that means we have to legalize marrying corpses or animals"

see the problem? people actually think in your world. and they can tell the difference between different topics. we don't slide effortlessly into lack of thought on major issues of liberty and rights. no one does. your argument is illogical FUD

simply having the tool or liberty to do one thing, does not automatically mean that using that tool or liberty in all cases is therefore legitimized or inevitable or even more likely

because people can tell the difference between different topics. we think. we're not blind

the very concept of the slippery slope is a logical fallacy that instantly marks the argument as invalid. it is used to make fear-based demagogue arguments

this doesn't mean i support blocking porn websites, it simply means that the act of blocking websites: phishing sites, child porn sites, etc., does not in any way have anything to do with restricting websites that have genuine free expression use that the govt may not like. to block those, the govt has to actually do that, and therefore is doing something new and different and not in any way related to blocking sites that really do need to be blocked (child porn, phishing, etc.)

you have to remove the thinking human being from the equation to make your bullshit argument work. or do you believe blocking websites requires some vast infrastructure that would not be viable nor exist if we didn't block child porn first? nonsense

you can say having a police dept is a slippery slope to martial law. except there is no actual slippery slope because people can actually tell the difference between different concepts of use for a police dept. as recent controversies in the usa demonstrate. and in fact without a police dept, society quickly succumbs to chaos

think

invoking the concept of the slippery slope removes you from the land of logic and reason and places you firmly in the land of fear based emotion

more socially conservative societies that restrict outlets for harmless sexual release do indeed have higher rates of rape and sexual violence in general. there is much truth to the concept of catharsis as a way to reduce rape and sexual violence. it doesn't prevent everything, just some of it

but bringing up child porn in this context is a red herring because the creation of child porn victimizes actual children, and this is why it is genuinely immoral illegal and verboten

sexual content between consenting adults is completely unrelated to child porn. to believe it is marks you as woefully inadequate to comment intelligently on the topic, or a failed troll