NationStates Jolt Archive

That's the question in this paper (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=913013#PaperDownload) by Anthony D'Amato, Leighton Professor of law at Northwestern. D'Amato served on a commission that studied the affect of porn on public behavior commissioned by President Nixon in 1970, and believes he has found evidence of an inverse correlation between increased access to pornography and the rate of rapes in the US. You can download both the paper and the abstract at the link above.

I'm always wary of correlations, since they're so easily bogus, but one thing this study points out is certainly accurate--rapes are down 85% over the last 25 years, and porn has been increasingly available over that period. If nothing else, we know that porn doesn't cause rapes, no matter what the Reagan commission came up with. Otherwise, we'd be swimming in them, especially considering the expanded definitions of rape and the rape shield laws that have made it easier for women to come forward.

Not really, porn is not really the same as sex.

What could give you more control than a PC mouse or a tv remote?

Probably not, but it would make TSI really happy.

I think we're all more promiscuous than we were back in the Nixon days, so maybe a lot more people are satisfied sexually.

Then again, I keep hearing that rape is about control, not about sex.
That's long been understood--it's not like rape was ever because guys had cases of blue balls. Rape has always been about domination and power.

No. No. No and no. Rape is not necessarily about sex. Rape is used as a psychological tool to inflict emotional and physical pain on a victim and give the raper a twisted sense of power and control.

I think we're all more promiscuous than we were back in the Nixon days, so maybe a lot more people are satisfied sexually.

Then again, I keep hearing that rape is about control, not about sex.

In a word: no.

The problem isn't the porn (or lack thereof). It's the attitudes toward sex. Simply adding porn into the mix isn't going to fix anything.

What will help is throwing out the puritanical ideas about sex and nudity. The reason you see fucked up behavior increasing in societies which ban porn is not because the porn is gone; it's because these societies are societies that over-sexualize EVERYTHING. A bared ankle is "nudity." A woman's breast is always sexual. Two people kissing makes everybody immediately think they're going to do IT, IT, IT!!!

Relaxing the rules against porn usually goes along with becoming a less sex-phobic society. But it is the loss of the sex-phobia, not the increase in porn, that is making the positive difference.

In a word: no.

The problem isn't the porn (or lack thereof). It's the attitudes toward sex. Simply adding porn into the mix isn't going to fix anything.

What will help is throwing out the puritanical ideas about sex and nudity. The reason you see fucked up behavior increasing in societies which ban porn is not because the porn is gone; it's because these societies are societies that over-sexualize EVERYTHING. A bared ankle is "nudity." A woman's breast is always sexual. Two people kissing makes everybody immediately think they're going to do IT, IT, IT!!!

Relaxing the rules against porn usually goes along with becoming a less sex-phobic society. But it is the loss of the sex-phobia, not the increase in porn, that is making the positive difference.
I guess the argument would be that porn itself forces changes in attitudes toward sex. Not in every case, obviously, and there's certain to be backlash at times, but over the long term, those attitudes change because of accessibility.

And I haven't read the whole paper yet, but I don't believe this author is suggesting that we make porn available on billboards. I think he's just trying to describe the phenomenon--porn accessibility increased, rape rates went down. Is there a connection? Like I said, I'm wary of correlations, as they often lead you down blind alleys. I'm looking more to start a discussion.

Haven't most serial rapists been found to be highly addicted to porn?

Rape is a lot more about power, than it is about sex. I don't think proliferating porn (which, is pretty much everywhere anyway) would put a stop to rape.

Porn gets you interested in sex and some like the violent kind. Such stuff would only fuel the desire not get rid of it.

In a word: no.

The problem isn't the porn (or lack thereof). It's the attitudes toward sex. Simply adding porn into the mix isn't going to fix anything.

What will help is throwing out the puritanical ideas about sex and nudity. The reason you see fucked up behavior increasing in societies which ban porn is not because the porn is gone; it's because these societies are societies that over-sexualize EVERYTHING. A bared ankle is "nudity." A woman's breast is always sexual. Two people kissing makes everybody immediately think they're going to do IT, IT, IT!!!

Relaxing the rules against porn usually goes along with becoming a less sex-phobic society. But it is the loss of the sex-phobia, not the increase in porn, that is making the positive difference.
How about public sex?:p

I guess the argument would be that porn itself forces changes in attitudes toward sex. Not in every case, obviously, and there's certain to be backlash at times, but over the long term, those attitudes change because of accessibility.

I don't think that's remotely true, any more than violent movies themselves force changes in attitudes toward violence. There are violent movies which have an encouraging effect on violent behavior, just as there is a great deal of porn which encourages rape.


And I haven't read the whole paper yet, but I don't believe this author is suggesting that we make porn available on billboards. I think he's just trying to describe the phenomenon--porn accessibility increased, rape rates went down. Is there a connection? Like I said, I'm wary of correlations, as they often lead you down blind alleys. I'm looking more to start a discussion.
Like I said, I think there is a connection, but it's more complicated than "more porn = less rapes." I think the REASON why there is more access to porn is important, as is the kind of porn that is being produced/consumed.

In other words, the equation is missing a piece. If, for instance, there is greater access to porn due to a decrease in the general level of sex phobia in the society (and, hence, a lessening of the prudery), then the equations are "less sex phobia => more porn," and "less sex phobia => fewer rapes." But more porn does not automatically equal fewer rapes, because the increase in porn and reduction in rape are both results from a shared cause, instead of the one causing the other.

It's so hard to tell "why".

Prince George's County, Maryland, in 2005, had more rapes than Baltimore, Maryland, Newark, New Jersey, and Miami, Florida - combined.

It's part suburb, part rural area - while the others are urban areas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_George's_County,_Maryland

As of the estimated census² of 2004, there were 842,967 people, 286,610 households, and 198,047 families residing in the county. The population density was 1,651/mi² (638/km²). There were 308,929 housing units at an average density of 1,651.1/mi² (241/km²).

The racial makeup of the county was:

* 62.70% African American
* 27.04% White
* 7.12% Hispanic or Latino
* 3.87% Asian
* 3.38% Other races
* 2.61% Two or More of any race
* 0.35% Native American
* 0.06% Pacific Islander


Compared to the other counties around the DC Metro area, it's a fucking combat zone. I would feel safer in Iraq.

And they have the same amount of porn as the rest of us - no more, no less.

I'm always wary of correlations, since they're so easily bogusIt's usually the interpretation that's bogus, not the corellation..

The same may well be the case here.. Consider a lot of other things have changed too. The number of illegal immigrants is certainly up several hundred percent since 25 years ago, maybe they make the street safer.
Or maybe it has to do with the decline of the pirate population (which however has an inverse correlation with global warming, you win some, you loose some)

It's so hard to tell "why".

Prince George's County, Maryland, in 2005, had more rapes than Baltimore, Maryland, Newark, New Jersey, and Miami, Florida - combined.

It's part suburb, part rural area - while the others are urban areas.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_George's_County,_Maryland



Compared to the other counties around the DC Metro area, it's a fucking combat zone. I would feel safer in Iraq.

And they have the same amount of porn as the rest of us - no more, no less.

Hrm, that's really odd. These confirmed rapes or just reports?

Hrm, that's really odd. These confirmed rapes or just reports?
Confirmed. It was admitted by the county, and currently getting big play in the local elections there.

Confirmed. It was admitted by the county, and currently getting big play in the local elections there.

Wow. That's amazing. Since I'm too lazy to look at the wiki article what's the murder/violent crime rate like?

Na. I think it's pretty obvious. Most of the baby boomers are impotent and old compared to back them. Heh. They'll go down as the 'wastest generation'.

Actually, I sort of agree with bottle, that one does not cause they other, but both result from a common cause.

Wow. That's amazing. Since I'm too lazy to look at the wiki article what's the murder/violent crime rate like?
Nothing in the wiki about the violent crime rate.

Murder is down this year, but that's not saying much compared to the other counties around the DC Metro area. If you have half a brain, and the means to live elsewhere, you do.

Hm my boss has been there, had to go to court there (twice). Car load of boozed up illegals ran under the 53' long trailer he was pulling. It was a brand new trailer. He had to drive out there, from Indiana, twice. They ended up dropping the charges against the illegals.

Yay for American justice!...