7 ms·

A lot can change over a decades time. I hope and believe that porn will eventually be a lot more restricted than it is today, as the societal downsides become m

A lot can change over a decades time. I hope and believe that porn will eventually be a lot more restricted than it is today, as the societal downsides become more and more apparent.

psyc 4y ago
MYOB and leave my porn alone.
kar5pt 4y ago
These "downsides" are mostly the pseudo-scientific imaginings of feminists and redpill conservatives. There's very little evidence that porn harms anyone so long as it features consenting adults - despite internet forums incessantly repeating the opposite. It's a classic case of people believing something because they heard it repeated over and over.
karamanolev 4y ago
While ubiquitous access porn is relatively new (I think) with printed magazines and now the internet, one still has a great reference from something much older - prostitution. One might conjecture that if society hasn't determined prostitution to be universally bad and banning it everywhere, then the same thing wouldn't happen to porn. A lot of progressive nations these days (citation needed) are aiming to regulate and make prostitution safer, not outright ban it. Now, aiming and succeeding are different things, I admit.
- namelessoracle 4y ago
  Society DID recognize it caused problems and basically banned it everywhere (or at least made it frowned upon). It's starting to look like removing some of the sexual morals that societies had used for hundreds of years is a classic Chesterton's fence style problem. Progressives didn't understand the good effects of some puritan policies and decided to throw it all out because it got in the way of them feeling good right now.
  - pas 4y ago
    Sure there was some utility gained from those rules, but then we looked at them and the cost-benefit analysis is pretty clearly against them. Limiting personal freedoms to satisfy old religious beliefs (some of which used to serve useful purposes) makes very little sense nowadays, especially that we have much much much better ways to get much better outcomes with regards to those purposes. (Eg. avoiding genetic defects due to incest, keeping communities growing to have enough people to replace those who are lost due to famines, disease, war, accidents.)
    - namelessoracle 4y ago
      The cost benefit analysis can take generations and is still ongoing. Cultures that have these rules and restrictions seem to be growing via positive birth rates while cultures that dont are stagnating and not growing and seem to be actively committing cultural suicide. So its not obvious to me which path evolutionary processes will choose to win out in the long run.
      - pas 4y ago
        I'm not against natalism, but simply looking at the size of a culture says very little about it.
- tsol 4y ago
  >One might conjecture that if society hasn't determined prostitution to be universally bad and banning it everywhere, then the same thing wouldn't happen to porn. These two things are hugely different. Kids can and do regularly begin viewing porn right at puberty. There was never such easy access to sexual simulation even with prostitutes. You also cannot photoshop a real life prostitute, or browse around for the most attractive one in the world. Every additional prostitute you are with is an extra price, whereas each additional porn star is free; it naturally leads to needing huge amounts of stimulation that's incredibly hard to get in real life unless you own a harem. And even then if you're into the really hard-core stuff you'd have a hard time finding willing participants. Porn and prostitution are totally different
samoa42 4y ago
> societal downsides become more and more apparent not sure, but in the greater picture of overpopulation, porn seems to be a cheap and effective measure compared to medical/physical alternatives.
- progrus 4y ago
  I guess when your benchmark is genocide, it doesn’t seem like that big of a deal.
  - samoa42 4y ago
    wouldn't call it genocide because it is not a selective measure. but yea, "preventing births" does qualify
    - progrus 4y ago
      I meant to say that the phrase “medical/physical alternatives” in the context you used it, means genocide.
      - omniglottal 4y ago
        To be clear, the word you're looking for is "eugenics".
      - dayglo 4y ago
        Or maybe just…free vasectomies? or even free condoms.
      - samoa42 4y ago
        as i tried to explain: it does not
        progrus 4y ago
        At the slightest hint of coercion toward those measures, it’s genocide. Even peer pressure. Be sure not to do that.
YurgenJurgensen 4y ago
Define ‘porn’. Are we banning romance novels and YouTube ASMR streams here?
- codebolt 4y ago
  Let's start with making hardcore SM-style porn inaccessible to kids and teens.
  - YurgenJurgensen 4y ago
    The thing with laws is that it doesn't matter where they "start"; it matters where they end. Open-ended laws are ripe for abuse, scope creep and selective enforcement.

A lot can change over a decades time. I hope and believe that porn will eventually be a lot more restricted than it is today, as the societal downsides become more and more apparent.

psyc 4y ago

MYOB and leave my porn alone.

kar5pt 4y ago

These "downsides" are mostly the pseudo-scientific imaginings of feminists and redpill conservatives. There's very little evidence that porn harms anyone so long as it features consenting adults - despite internet forums incessantly repeating the opposite. It's a classic case of people believing something because they heard it repeated over and over.

karamanolev 4y ago

While ubiquitous access porn is relatively new (I think) with printed magazines and now the internet, one still has a great reference from something much older - prostitution. One might conjecture that if society hasn't determined prostitution to be universally bad and banning it everywhere, then the same thing wouldn't happen to porn. A lot of progressive nations these days (citation needed) are aiming to regulate and make prostitution safer, not outright ban it. Now, aiming and succeeding are different things, I admit.

namelessoracle 4y ago
Society DID recognize it caused problems and basically banned it everywhere (or at least made it frowned upon). It's starting to look like removing some of the sexual morals that societies had used for hundreds of years is a classic Chesterton's fence style problem. Progressives didn't understand the good effects of some puritan policies and decided to throw it all out because it got in the way of them feeling good right now.
- pas 4y ago
  Sure there was some utility gained from those rules, but then we looked at them and the cost-benefit analysis is pretty clearly against them. Limiting personal freedoms to satisfy old religious beliefs (some of which used to serve useful purposes) makes very little sense nowadays, especially that we have much much much better ways to get much better outcomes with regards to those purposes. (Eg. avoiding genetic defects due to incest, keeping communities growing to have enough people to replace those who are lost due to famines, disease, war, accidents.)
  - namelessoracle 4y ago
    The cost benefit analysis can take generations and is still ongoing. Cultures that have these rules and restrictions seem to be growing via positive birth rates while cultures that dont are stagnating and not growing and seem to be actively committing cultural suicide. So its not obvious to me which path evolutionary processes will choose to win out in the long run.
    - pas 4y ago
      I'm not against natalism, but simply looking at the size of a culture says very little about it.
tsol 4y ago
>One might conjecture that if society hasn't determined prostitution to be universally bad and banning it everywhere, then the same thing wouldn't happen to porn. These two things are hugely different. Kids can and do regularly begin viewing porn right at puberty. There was never such easy access to sexual simulation even with prostitutes. You also cannot photoshop a real life prostitute, or browse around for the most attractive one in the world. Every additional prostitute you are with is an extra price, whereas each additional porn star is free; it naturally leads to needing huge amounts of stimulation that's incredibly hard to get in real life unless you own a harem. And even then if you're into the really hard-core stuff you'd have a hard time finding willing participants. Porn and prostitution are totally different

samoa42 4y ago

> societal downsides become more and more apparent not sure, but in the greater picture of overpopulation, porn seems to be a cheap and effective measure compared to medical/physical alternatives.

progrus 4y ago
I guess when your benchmark is genocide, it doesn’t seem like that big of a deal.
- samoa42 4y ago
  wouldn't call it genocide because it is not a selective measure. but yea, "preventing births" does qualify
  - progrus 4y ago
    I meant to say that the phrase “medical/physical alternatives” in the context you used it, means genocide.
    - omniglottal 4y ago
      To be clear, the word you're looking for is "eugenics".
    - dayglo 4y ago
      Or maybe just…free vasectomies? or even free condoms.
    - samoa42 4y ago
      as i tried to explain: it does not
      - progrus 4y ago
        At the slightest hint of coercion toward those measures, it’s genocide. Even peer pressure. Be sure not to do that.

YurgenJurgensen 4y ago

Define ‘porn’. Are we banning romance novels and YouTube ASMR streams here?

codebolt 4y ago
Let's start with making hardcore SM-style porn inaccessible to kids and teens.
- YurgenJurgensen 4y ago
  The thing with laws is that it doesn't matter where they "start"; it matters where they end. Open-ended laws are ripe for abuse, scope creep and selective enforcement.