I get where you commin from with this, but you gotta realize, that some people, REALLY ARE THAT STUPID. I know it sound unlikely but people are idiots, and if grown people act as dumb and ignorant as they do, then what the hell do you think some kids who already dont know shit about the world is going to take somthing.

You just cant show a 2 year old stuff like that, at least put it in a propler context for them first, explain it to them so that they'll know what they are seeing.

as for a 2 yr old playin mortal combat, wouldnt a 2 year old be learning better moter skills and learning how to speak?

im just sayin i wouldnt want my kids first word to be TOASTY!!!!

Might as well give 8 year olds the right to vote while we're at it.....

its called kids vote, my not count but it gives them a political voice that can just be ignored in the future

At 11/8/08 09:35 AM, poxpower wrote: <rant rant rant>

What does any of that have to do with little children?

At 11/8/08 09:06 AM, poxpower wrote:

Would you think the same thing if the panel were all men?

No.

That's really all I needed to hear.

At 11/3/08 01:39 AM, poxpower wrote:

EXPLAIN THIS UNIVERSE WE LIVE IN TO ME

It's a fucked up one mah boi!

Imp, sorry for my laziness, but my time hath become precious, so I don't really have it to read through all the articles you've cited... I have a question.

Do any of the studies discuss the relationship between shildren, pornography and social ideals when a parent, guardian or someone else is there to teach them what is what? Basically, if a parent is, y'know, parental, and teaches the child about fantasy, rape, dangers, pleasures and all that stuff, is there any difference from those who view it in a vacuum?

I ask this because people I know all look at porn (hell, those who claim they don't we call "liars"), and all of us are well-adjusted, equal-rights, female-respecting, non-violent, well-adjusted people. It might be a perspective thing, but I see no harm come from my many (many, many) years of pornographic enjoyment, or that of others.

The only thing that I think might have to do with it, is that my parents were parental, and taught me the value of equality and fairness... and, while not specifically about pornography, those lessons certainly apply. Had they been a little less involved, I could see how porn might slant my views.

But should we damn something because people don't properly understand it? Or because parents don't properly prepare their children for such things? It sounds to me like blaming video games for violence, or guns for shootings, rather than a society that values (or doesn't) teaching each other responsibility and knowledge. With the proper parenting, I would bet that viewing pornography at a young age wouldn't have much effect on the social views of a person at all.

And I was wondering if any of the studies you have linked showed such a correlation.

Also, another idea would be the effect of the social stigma attached to sex and nudity in our culture and how that effects people's attitudes towards, and reactions to, pornography.

Ugh... sounds to me like I have some dissertation topics if I ever go into sociology...

At 11/8/08 11:07 PM, Ravariel wrote: ...all of us are well-adjusted, equal-rights, female-respecting, non-violent, well-adjusted people.

These dp lulz brought to you by the DRD, the Department of Redundancy Department.

Do any of the studies discuss the relationship between shildren, pornography and social ideals when a parent, guardian or someone else is there to teach them what is what? Basically, if a parent is, y'know, parental, and teaches the child about fantasy, rape, dangers, pleasures and all that stuff, is there any difference from those who view it in a vacuum?

No and I'd be hard pressed to find one, mainly because porn being illegal for kids, such research would have a hard time passing an ethics committee.

The point isn't that with good parents and a safe environment people turn out alright. The point is porn is like everything else.

Whether it's alcohol, pot, cigs, porn, violence, video games, etc, they have an effect.

The research on all these things is pretty clear, right down to violent video games. They have an effect on kids, and it's not a healthy one. Most kids turn out alright, most adults drink responsibly, and most people don't view women as play things.

Is it a major effect? Not necessarily. I grew up in the burbs, good parents, strong schooling, played war games my whole life. Most people can say they're fine as well.

But these things are all regulated so that people ARE responsible enough to handle them.
What possible motivation can drive someone to presume 8 year olds are responsible enough to know about porn, which ANYONE should agree is not necessarily the best representation of sex?

That's my complaint. It's not that I find porn should be banned, it's that I find the age regulation fine as is, and there's absolutely NO reason I see why kids need to be asking mommy and daddy "what's double penetration?"......

Porn is not sex ed, in the same way The Sims is not a workshop on how to make friends, and Sim City isn't "City Planning 101".......

Simply put:
Can a 5th grader handle the following:
How to have safe sex
how to deal with pregnancy
How women should be treated
What constitutes a healthy sexual relationship
What constitutes an unhealthy sexual relationship
What is improper sexual behavior (and why)
What is proper sexual behavior (and why)

More importantly: Should a 5th grader even have to be concerned about the above things?

When the hell did safe sexual procedures; "fantasy, rape, dangers, pleasures and all that stuff" become standard for parenting?

When I was in 5th grade I didn't worry about all that shit, why the hell should I make my kid learn that shit?

Quite frankly, I am a firm believer that kids should be.....KIDS.
I don't know when this attitude of turning 10 year olds into responsible productive members of society became the ideal for childhood, but I think it sucks.
I think kids should know three things:
1.) Don't cross the street without looking both ways
2.) Don't talk to strangers
3.) Momma bear rules the house

Other than that.......how about just lettin the kid be a kid?

I don't think porn should be accessible to kids because kids are not responsible enough to handle the ramifications of proper sexual behavior in Western society, NOR do I think that's something they should even be concerned with.

If you and Pox and whoever the hell else really feel kids should be allowed to see porn at such a young age, you tell me why, because I think kids are growing up faster than they need to already, and parents have enough stress. The birds and the bees talk revolving around PORN of all things should not be on Tuesday's schedule right before peewee baseball.....

At 11/8/08 11:07 PM, Ravariel wrote: With the proper parenting, I would bet that viewing pornography at a young age wouldn't have much effect on the social views of a person at all.

That's the thing. Parental involvement is crucial... that's why other things which are age restricted (such as movies) allow underage youths to still view what's going on IF accompanied by an adult. It's not like simply having an adult present will automatically make the kid wiser to what's going on, rather, the adult is there to explain the difference between fantasy and reality as it's applicable to what the movie is presenting.

No one is arguing that, AUTOMATICALLY, kids are going to act deviant after witnessing deviant behavior. The thing is, when you witness such-&-such behavior on a regular basis it stops being "deviant" and starts being "normal" in the eyes of the viewer without proper guidance. THAT is the reason why pornography is potentially harmful... it presents negatives as positives in an environment where it is unlikely that any adult guidance would be contributed. Hell, if kids watched porn with their parents then mayyyyyyyyyybe it WOULD be helpful... however, it isn't, therefore, it's not.

At 11/9/08 12:31 AM, Imperator wrote: No and I'd be hard pressed to find one, mainly because porn being illegal for kids, such research would have a hard time passing an ethics committee.

Fair point. :P

The research on all these things is pretty clear, right down to violent video games. They have an effect on kids, and it's not a healthy one. Most kids turn out alright, most adults drink responsibly, and most people don't view women as play things.

I'm not so sure we can call the effect "negative". Without context, and other information, sure it might be, but is that really how we must judge everything? Without context, a kid with a rock can have a negative effect.

But these things are all regulated so that people ARE responsible enough to handle them.

War games are regulated? Shit, I guess we better stop selling 40k to those 10-year-olds! ;-P

My point is this: what place is it for anyone other than parents to regulate these things? I was curious and learning about sex when I was about 11-12. My parents weren't the instigators, nor really the facilitators, of that curiosity, or the ways in which I learned. However, their general demeanor and lessons gave me the basis in which to put the information in context, and use it in a reasonable fashion. Some kids wouldn't start as early, some would start earlier. It's an individual thing.

What possible motivation can drive someone to presume 8 year olds are responsible enough to know about porn, which ANYONE should agree is not necessarily the best representation of sex?

If the child is curious about it, then why not answer the questions he or she has?

That's my complaint. It's not that I find porn should be banned, it's that I find the age regulation fine as is, and there's absolutely NO reason I see why kids need to be asking mommy and daddy "what's double penetration?"......

Lol... my sister asked my dad what a "blowjob" was when she was 8, nearly gave him a coronary. You don't get to choose when those questions pop up. Let the child, him/herself guide the learning. They're remarkable at setting their own pace for learning.

Can a 5th grader handle the following:
How to have safe sex
how to deal with pregnancy
How women should be treated
What constitutes a healthy sexual relationship
What constitutes an unhealthy sexual relationship
What is improper sexual behavior (and why)
What is proper sexual behavior (and why)

Maybe, depends on the 5th grader. I could have handled, had I not died from embarrassment, many of those topics had my parents raised them. While I may not be the most average of folk, I'm sure I'm hardly alone.

More importantly: Should a 5th grader even have to be concerned about the above things?

5th graders... not parents, not society, and certainly not government... decide when they're interested in things. And sometimes, the situation forces itself from outside, through abuse from adults, other kids, and other unpleasantness. Having the ability and the resources to cover these topics, including pornography, is a very important aspect of parenting. Now that's not to say that you'll need to have a copy of Back Door Sluts 9 on hand to illustrate, but a kid WILL find a way to learn about it if he or she becomes interested.

When the hell did safe sexual procedures; "fantasy, rape, dangers, pleasures and all that stuff" become standard for parenting?

From the dawn of time. Sorry, teaching kids about what sex is is one of the basics of parenting.

When I was in 5th grade I didn't worry about all that shit, why the hell should I make my kid learn that shit?

You shouldn't. However, you also shouldn't force them to not learn about it until you're ready. You wait until THEY'RE ready.

I think kids should know three things:
1.) Don't cross the street without looking both ways
2.) Don't talk to strangers
3.) Momma bear rules the house

Other than that.......how about just lettin the kid be a kid?

Fine... now I'm going to have to welcome you to the real world, where shit ain't so neat and clean. What happens when your 10-year-old asks what those magazines at the corner store are? What about the "blocked" channels? What about older siblings/friends showing them stuff. You don't get to choose when they're introduced to porn... however, you CAN prepare them for how to deal with it beforehand (even if not explicitly), and also teach them how to deal afterwards.

I don't think porn should be accessible to kids because kids are not responsible enough to handle the ramifications of proper sexual behavior in Western society, NOR do I think that's something they should even be concerned with.

Again, you're thinking about this like you'll actually be able to block websites from a kid who'll probably be able to design a website by the time he's 5 and can run circles around your lame excuse for a v-chip with a few remote presses. YOU DON'T GET TO CHOOSE. I'm not saying that porn should be marketed or sold to kids.... merely that we as people and parents need to back off the vilification and realize that like it or not, they're going to be exposed, and they'll need information in order to handle it in a healthy way... just like with anything, be it actual sex, making friends (one of the earlier lessons) sharing, fairness, driving a car, getting a job, etc.

If you and Pox and whoever the hell else really feel kids should be allowed to see porn at such a young age, you tell me why, because I think kids are growing up faster than they need to already, and parents have enough stress. The birds and the bees talk revolving around PORN of all things should not be on Tuesday's schedule right before peewee baseball.....

I simply think we need to un-taboo everything about physicality, nudity and sexuality (yes, I realize the futility of that, but still...). Once it's not such a cultural boogey-man, then people, kids especially, will be more able to handle it in a healthy way.

At 11/8/08 08:16 PM, Cornbucket wrote:

What does any of that have to do with little children?

Because they claim that porn and the media in general give people the impression that women are sex objects and apparently that is really horrible but I believe it's a double standard and they should shut the fuck up and count their blessings.

At 11/9/08 12:31 AM, Imperator wrote:

No and I'd be hard pressed to find one, mainly because porn being illegal for kids, such research would have a hard time passing an ethics committee.

I told you.

That's my complaint. It's not that I find porn should be banned, it's that I find the age regulation fine as is, and there's absolutely NO reason I see why kids need to be asking mommy and daddy "what's double penetration?"......

I'm also for some regulations, I'm just saying: really, who gives a shit?
I'd shield kids from violence a lot more than I'd shield them from porn too. In fact I'd shield a kid from a horror movie way faster than I'd shield a kid from an ultra-violent movie.

If you and Pox and whoever the hell else really feel kids should be allowed to see porn at such a young age, you tell me why

With the internet, you won't be able to stop them. So I say: instead of struggling to ban, censor and regulate, let's just admit that it's not that bad and move on. The people who seek to ban porn usually expand their censorship like a blazing supernova, including more and more sites that range from "violent" to "time-wasters" to "offensive" etc. Some place like newgrounds could one day be restricted and have to bend over and take it because a giant censorship company that deserves millions of people has decided it's too violent for kids under, I dunno, 13 or 18 or whatever.

You see where I'm going with this? A completely free market of ideas like the internet suddenly has to bend to the will of the moral patrol who base their "findings" on nonexistant studies and exaggerated possible and projected effects.