Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, November 01, 2007
Rebecca Hagelin :: Townhall.com Columnist
Protecting your children from perverts and pornography
by Rebecca Hagelin
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


Just reading the headlines is enough to make you feel numb.

Scan the “news feed” at familyfragments.com, and you’ll see what I mean:

“Man Admits He Had Child Pornography” … “Child Sex Tourism Raises Its Head in India” … “Two Men Sentenced for Running International Pornography Business” … “Judge Sentences Porn Spammers to 5+ Years” … “Mom Awarded $85,000 for Daughters’ Exposure to Motel Porn” … “Police Arrest Man Accused of Raping Little Girl on Videotape.”

That’s only a fraction of them, I’m afraid.

The subject matter of these articles alone -- even without the grotesque details -- is enough to churn your stomach and make you want to turn away in disgust.

But we can’t turn our backs on the fact that pornography -- photographic records of the abhorrent deeds described above -- is a monumental, pervasive problem in our modern, over-sexualized culture. We must fight back against the purveyors of smut -- and help the casual consumer understand that consumption of this vile material harms individuals and society as a whole. It’s a task that motivates many good pro-family groups -- groups that fight against a multi-billion-dollar industry that has successfully seduced a nation into buying and selling human flesh.

One wonderful group is the Lighted Candle Society, which runs familyfragments.com. Lighted Candle doesn’t simply collect news links. Its mission is to fight the producers and distributors of pornography and to finance scientific research into the addictive nature of porn. The group relies on the ground-breaking research of Dr. Judith Reisman, author of “Kinsey, Sex and Fraud.” And its trustees include a colleague of mine whose name you may recognize: Edwin Meese III.

It’s been 21 years since General Meese spearheaded the Attorney General’s Commission on Pornography and released a landmark report on the harms of pornography. Anyone who thinks that porn is, generally speaking, nothing more than harmless fun should read through the “Victimization” chapter of the Meese Report. It’s absolutely chilling. The trail of broken homes and broken hearts that the porn industry has left in its wake is astounding. (More recent stories appear on another Lighted Candle site, herstorylives.com.)

Dr. Reisman’s research “reveals that frequent use of pornography creates addiction and … damage in the structure and the function of the brain,” notes John Harmer, chairman of the Lighted Candle Society, who dedicates his book “The Sex Industrial Complex” to Reisman. “Through the use of fMRI’s (functional magnetic resonance imaging), we can now watch the human brain react to the stimuli of violence and pornography.”

The under-developed brains of our children are most at risk -- and they are, not coincidentally, right in the crosshairs of the smut peddlers. As shown by the numerous statistics listed on the outstanding Web site of “Enough is Enough” -- a group I had the privilege to help launch in 1994 -- teenagers are a key target of the porn industry.

Purveyors of porn and perversion know exactly how to prey on the raging hormones of our sons and daughters and lure them into a seedy, dark world. They are experts at manipulating young minds for money. If they can reel them in at a young age, they can cultivate customers for life.

The marketing effort to condemn our children to a life based on sexual fixation is so pervasive that I devote an entire chapter to the topic in my book, Home Invasion: Protecting Your Family in a Culture That’s Gone Stark Raving Mad. You must understand that the pornographers are after your children 24/7. Pornography is a $12 billion-a-year industry -- their goal is turn your kids into porn addicts. Period.

Most teenagers who are exposed to pornography don’t wind up on a police blotter, but they do suffer immense harm. Jill Manning, a former visiting fellow at The Heritage Foundation, charted the cost in a paper she presented to a special U.S. Senate subcommittee. Her review of the peer-reviewed research reveals that children who consume pornography tend to:

  • Develop tolerance toward sexually explicit material, thereby requiring more novel or bizarre material to achieve the same level of arousal or interest.
  • Overestimate the prevalence of less common sexual practices (e.g., group sex, bestiality and sadomasochistic activity).
  • Abandon the goal of sexual exclusivity with a partner.
  • Perceive promiscuity as a normal state of interaction.
  • Develop cynical attitudes about love.
  • Believe that raising children and having a family is an unattractive prospect.
  • Develop a negative body image, especially for women.

If you’re a parent, the best thing to do (besides, of course, avoiding pornography yourself) is protect your children and make sure they aren’t targeted by some pervert. These days, that task usually starts with the Internet -- how it’s accessed in your home, when and by whom. Your child doesn’t have to be a victim -- be pro-active and keep your home smut-free. “Enough is Enough” has some very useful information, as does Web Wise Kids. Their interactive programs make kids aware of the dangers that lurk on the Web so they can “make wise online choices.”

Mom and Dad, you are responsible for protecting your children from those who would use and abuse them to make a buck. Who’s going to win? You … or the pornographers?
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Rebecca Hagelin is a public speaker on the family and culture and the author of the new best seller, 30 Ways in 30 Days to Save Your Family.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Rebecca Hagelin's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Here's a thought:
While you're at it, how about protecting children from the other horrors of this world - namely, people who spew hate towards brown people, gays and various other powerless minority groups?

How about protecting them from people who advocate torture of other humans as okay "depending"?

Here's a thought:
While you're at it, how about protecting children from the other horrors of this world - namely, people who spew hate towards brown people, gays and various other powerless minority groups?

How about protecting them from people who advocate torture of other humans as okay "depending"?

Also, funnily enough, the "perverts" in the headlines these days seem to be all of the Republican persuasion. It's quite well known that Larry Flynt has a dossier on them all, and perhaps this is why Ms. Hagelin got her marching orders from Republican HQ to go after THIS particular porn king. He's known for his disdain for hypocritical, self righteous Republicans who sanctimoniously admonish others for their sins, all the while tapping their toes at some notorious mens' room stall for illicit encounters with other men. And he's not afraid to use that knowledge against them.

'Powerless minority groups'?
'Gays' are "powerless minority groups'? Well I'll be darned. I didn't know that!

Hey you all, go out and hug a 'gay' today. Make 'em feel welcome...

Bob C
"Here's a few specifics. There's never been a Republican president who's diddled a girl young enough to be his grandaughter in the Oval Office."

That's because they are after the boys! (Which was Talisman's point).

I don't think Lewinsky was young enough to be Clinton's granddaughter, even by average white trash reproduction age rates.

Mary C.

N/A
That's because they are after the boys! (Which was Talisman's point).

Uh Huh. You mean like Gary Studds, Barney Frank and Mark Foley among many other Dems?

Mandatory death penalty
The mandatory death penalty for the creeps who are involved in peddling such filth or are otherwise involved in molesting kids will in short order clear the decks - and in the process, solve the homosexual problem.

But I'm afraid that the US is long past the point of no return and that we're heading down the same perverted path as the UK.

Are you people
nucking futs! The article is about protecting children from perverts and pornographers and you can't even agree on that!? The title should have included morons!!

Critical thinking skills?
The fact that such ridiculous off-threads are occuring here shows just how ludicrous our society has become. Sexual predators should be serving much more time in jail than somebody who got caught smoking a joint, yet they don't. People get fired up over sexually active politicans not because the politicians are low-lifes (which they are) but because the people are stupid enough to vote for Ds and Rs time and again while proclaiming their moral superiority. No one likes to look foolish, and yet all of us obviously are who pull a lever based on the mistaken assumption that an alphabet letter will bring the Utopia of ones choice, if the other side would just sit down and shut up.
The far left dips need to get over it and accept the fact that most Americans believe in the individual, capitalism, and the right to a smaller, more limited government. I don't need a nanny state to protect me from myself, I need a government that works for me by protecting me from those who would harm me, both foreign and domestic.
The far right needs to ignore what offends them, teach their children the ways that they want to teach, and then let adults be adults. If someone is going to burn in hell, who are you to say it must be otherwise? Jesus wanted you to spead the word through loving acts of kindness, not legislative acts of paranoia. Teach a child in the way he should go, and when he is older he will not turn from it.
I'm sick of the cat-fights and the insistence that one side is morally superior to the other. Real tolerance hasn't existed in this country since those idiots distorted Watergate. Live your own lives, both sides of the politcal philosophy, and leave others alone. sheesh.

Bob C,
Your list of democrat sex offenders should have included congressman Mel Reynolds, who seduced a 16 year old girl his daughter went to school with. The evidence was ironclad, so he went to prison. However, he didn't serve his full sentence. Why? He was pardoned by Bill Clinton on the last day of that reprobate's second term. Jesse Jackson then gave him a job which gave him access to more teenage girls. He bought a house across the street from a middle school, but when the parents found out, they ran him out of town. What a fine example of democrat values!

Mr. Nobody,
Nope. Ron Paul. He is happily married to the same woman he married 52 years ago. He has never seduced an employee, although I'm sure he has had many a cute young nurse working under him. He has never drowned a woman he was trying to commit adultery with after getting s**t-faced drunk. He doesn't vote for all of the theft and misuse of taxpayer money the other congressmmen regularly support.He doesn't even participate in the congressional pension program, which he considers stealing. When it comes to moral uprightness, no other candidate comes anywhere close to the good doctor.

Mr. Nobody,
I most certainly am not.

Mixed Messages
Seems like the initial premise of this article is that parents should do all they can to prevent their children from being exposed to pornography. I agree that instilling values in children is the parents' job. However, the underlying message I'm getting is that pornography should be banned and pornographers jailed.

But Hagelin points out that porn is a $12+ billion business. There's no way that much demand will go unsupplied. I remind those in favor of banning porn how well it worked out when alcohol was banned. And I suggest that they check in on the war on drugs - roughly 90 years later with countless trillions spent and still anyone can get their drug of choice within hours if not minutes.

So, I recommend that those worried about their children encountering porn make it clear that you do not approve of their viewing porn. But avoid the urge to abolish a thriving business; it is likely to blow up in your face.

talisman writes: 01, 2007 12:13 AM

..how about protecting children from ….people who spew hate towards brown people, gays and various other powerless minority groups?

DESKJOCKEY WRITES

As Opera, Michael Jordon, Tiger Wood, Whitney Houston, Diana Ross etc. demonstrate as a nation the Whites idolize non-white skin, the darker the better.

The religion of Analtheism is the most powerful and richest group man for man.

talisman writes:

How about protecting them from people who advocate torture of other humans as okay "depending"?

DESKJOCKEY WRITES

I assume you refer to having Bubba push poop up your dirt chute. The torture laws that prohibit this are uniform not “depending”.

talisman writes

...the "perverts" in the headlines these days seem to be all of the Republican persuasion.

DESKJOCKEY WRITES

Perverts from other parties is not news. Barney Frank was running a pervert operation in his basement 25 years ago and everybody yawned because he is supposed to be a pervert and he is beyond knowing it any longer. Larry Craig provides news because he is still able distinguish perversion.

talisman writes:

Ms. Hagelin got her marching orders from Republican HQ to go after THIS particular porn king.

DESKJOCKEY WRITES

I thought GWB writes the columns and Hagelin submits them under her name?

Congrats
Congragulations to all who, not able to refute the facts or conclusions of the article, pursue the objective of changing the subject.

Porn is big business, we all know that. And we also know that trashy entertainment is big business.

My question is, how many people with faith and values enable these organizations to thrive. Somebody serves as their office supplies vendor, cleane their "studios", sells them video/audio equipment, etc. Maybe even some of our dear readers.

Just like millions of "ordinary" people enabled the Nazi leaders to carry out their evil designs.

If every person of good conscience refused to cooperate with the production, distribution, and marketing of trash, we would clean up our world.

In the meantime, every parent, please MAKE the time to go purchase and install filter and monitoring tools.

Arguing the Facts
Citations, conclusions, and opinions are not facts.

Hagelin's list of conclusions about the "damage" porn does to teenagers was prefaced thusly:

"Her review of the peer-reviewed research reveals that children who consume pornography tend to:" It does not say the every child who ever encountered porn exhibited the listed symptoms, and there's no way to accurately project how many of the kids out there do or do not view porn. People generally lie when asked if they participate in an activity that is viewed by their peers as unbecoming if they actually do it. If you need a for-instance, I recommend you poll your associates on when they last masturbated.

So to conclude that being subjected to porn is damaging is an opinion and goes back to one's values. One could argue that developing an insensitivity to porn is a favorable outcome, but it would still be an argument. Which is why it is up to parents to instill values in their children. Once we're grown up we should be left alone to decide whether we want to enjoy porn or not.

Galltegfa
You are wrong to think that "tend to" is not enough to make us worried. But you missed the bigger sleight of hand. A review of peer-reviewed research does not itself need to be a peer-reviewed paper.

Scientists do not set out to "research into the addictive nature of porn" they set out to research whether and to what degree there is an addictive nature of porn."

And to dayte the way to get the strongest link between danger and Porn (at least to adultes who are the ones spending the 12 billion dollars) is to get the studies away from scientist and into the hands of advocates.

Remember the Meese commission came about because a scientific study found that there was no a great danger in pornography. So it was felt that a better study was needed, one by a commission that all believed going in that porn is dangerous.

Lon
Actually, I didn't miss it; I was trying to avoid addressing the motives of the people conducting the study. It seemed simpler to point out that "tend to" is a really loose term and that the assumption that a true sampling of the teenage population who "consumes" porn is flawed.

If you or your children can't...
...use the computer without getting sucked into pornography, you should probably get rid of your computer. Make no mistake about it, it will destroy your soul.

We have a few structures in our household that have helped us keep us and our children safe from it. Besides the filters, we only have one computer area in a central location in our house and it is a rule that nobody uses the computer without someone else in the room. Kids time on the computer should also be limited. They need to go outside and get some air. They will be happier if they do.

But most of all, those who are in its throws need God...desperately. They need to plead for His help and go out and do whatever it takes to conquer this insidious evil. There is no effort to overcome that won't be reinforced by the Lord if we are diligent. If there is anyone reading this who has a problem, please don't give up your fight against this addiction. There is light and there is hope, but you have to get engaged in defeating the problem.

Studies
Supposing we set aside the scientific studies for the moment. Some things are simply known due to widespread observation. Case in point -- smoking. People who smoked heavily tended, in large numbers, to develop emphysema and lung cancer. Observant people knew this years before scientific studies proved it. Oh, and golly gee, churches preached against smoking long before the science proved it, but let's not give the rigid moralists any credit.

There are many of us observant folk who take note of the damaged lives and relationships, with porn a cause or certainly a contributing factor. For us, we don't need your academic acrobatics to tell us that we don't know what we have already observed and perhaps, sadly, experienced.


talisman
I think the title of the article says it all.

Parents should be responsible and protect their children from perverts and pornography.

It's as simple as that.

In the article the author isn't saying "Democrats are demons and full of perverts" or anything. She isn't taking a stand on what poltical party is to blame for anything. So why are you Democrats acting like that is what she's doing?

She's just saying that there are forces out there we should all be aware of, regardless of your political persuasion, that are detrimental to children.

So talisman, if you disagree with her, let's hear your views. There's no need to go on an attack against Republicans right off the bat. Why are you acting so defensive about this?

Talisman
What a Dimwit of a Demagogue.

How to stop perverts
A Ruger Long Barrel Peacemaker.

Wishful Thinking
"She isn't taking a stand on what poltical party is to blame for anything. So why are you Democrats acting like that is what she's doing?"

I'm not a Democrat and me thinks you are suffering from a case of wishful thinking.

When she rolled our her big wig name, were you guessing "Hillary Clinton"? No.

She did quite the opposite, she rolled Ed Meese.

If you were trying to create a list of names that was sure to alienate liberals on moral issues and in equal measure attract conservatives, the name Ed Meese would be right below the name William Bennett.

She is taking a stand, she rolled out Ed Meese. It is also guaranteed that the organizations she is referring too are of the same political impartiality as "The Family Research Council".

The problem with conservatives today is that they have so vilified liberals that they can no longer associate with them for any cause or risked being outcast by their followers.

We can no longer be Americans, just liberals and conservatives.

There is real irony here with respect to pornography. Tipper Gore help start an organization that wanted labeling on music. How did Republicans respond? They vilified her and accused her of Nazi style censorship. When Hillary Clinton tried to do the same thing for video games, what did Republicans do? Vilify Clinton for Nazi style censorship.


Yet, and here is where the irony comes in, when Congress passes anti-pornography laws upwards of 90% of Congress vote yes. Both Democrats and Republicans want and end to pornography yet the right wing sound machine, the right wing hate all things liberal, will cut off its nose to spite its face and attack a liberal who champions the very same cause.

No, this is definitely a political party stand, the same way the "Family Research Council" is. Which is too bad because Democrats do not want pornography either.



Sorry Perspective
Rebbecca is safe with this issue because as a moral it is called a sin in the Bible.

But what a video gaming in general? Academics (aka liberals) have studies to show that video games, any of them, can be addicting and that addiction bad for your child's health.

1.) Obesity. Children are spending less time outdoors this generation and video games have been directly linked to this trend.

2.) Parents do not protect their children from video games as much as they do pornography. Therefore a child can literally spend hours-on-end playing video games with a parents approval.

The sorry perspective is this. Conservatives cannot raise the alarm on any social issue unless it is discussed in the Bible. Unfortunately most of the things that are damaging your kids as a result of technology are NOT in the Bible. This means that liberals will be the only one sounding the alarms on things like obesity being the result of too much computer and video game time spent by children.


One of the causes for the decline of Rome was lead pipes. The Bible doesn't prohibit lead pipes ergo in today's world if the same situation applied to American as Rome conservatives would ignore the problem and liberals would be sounding the alarm.

Video gaming has a far more addictive and deter mental effect on children than pornography yet Republicans have nothing to say on the subject because God doesn't prohibit it.

And that is a sorry perspective.

AGAIN...Here is one source
SALVO Issue 2 Spring 2007

The entire issue is devoted to Porn and Sex-related problems in our culture.

Read it. Make up your own mind.

Raising Alarms
Laura Ingram has an alarm she is trying to raise, a cause to champion.

Do you think any liberals will pay it any heed?

Why does Rebbecca think that without liberal names mentioned in this column she will be any more successful than Laura Ingram?

Both suffer from the James Dobson syndrome. It doesn't matter what fact the "Family Research Council" council unearths because it is the FRC.

Laura and Rebbecca both will get their air time on conservative media, with much hand-wringing and kudos. And accomplish little to nothing.

Same applies to liberals. If Hillary Clinton raises some alarm which actually proves to be true, could any of you support here?

That sad state of affairs these days is that all alarms have been politicized to the point that the devil can do his work. The pornographers can do as they wish without serious threat of consequences for damages rendered unto this country because liberals and conservatives are too busy ignoring each other.

That is the first battle Rebbecca needs to fight. She needs to champion that liberals and conservatives can raise alarms that the other can support. Liberals are already against pornography. Awareness doesn't have to be raised.

What needs to be raised is that liberals and conservatives can be seen in the public square working together to champion a cause. This means the right wing sound machine would have to support Hillary Clinton in her alarm about children and video games.

That is Rebbecca's first battle that needs fought in order to fight pornography.

Why, Why, Why do libs like porn so much?
Every time an anti-porn article is posted, libs respond that (1) its up to parents to protect their kids or, (2) no government censorship!

First issue: Why didn't the left take the same position with cigarettes? There is a mountain of evidence that cigarettes are bad, so the tobacco companies were sued into oblivion and non-smoking laws were passed everywhere. There is now a mountain of evidence that porn is very harmful to both kids and adults. So where are the armies of attorneys and government regulators? In the back room with the latest issue of Playboy?

Second issue: Porn is commercial speech, not political. Commerical speech can be regulated for legitimate government purposes. Based on the current evidence regarding the harm caused by porn, city and state governments would be fully justified in banning all porn. Since the left is so concerned about individuals, if a porn ban could save a single child from terrible sexual abuse, then the ban is fully justified.

Apples and fence posts
talisman, your analogy is like comparing apples to fence posts.

Besides, is it your position that because we cannot fix all of the evils of the world then we should not fix any?

Joining Feminists
Rebbecca had better be careful as she could cross the political line into sounding like a feminist and thus loose here conservative credentials.

As long as she stays focused on the damage to children and remains silent on the damage to women she'll be ok.

But she had better be careful because feminists have been screaming for the elimination of pornography for years.

When I was going to college the pornography question of the day was "Is Roger Mapplethorpe pornography". His photographs commonly "objectified" women, as the feminists put it, by showing them without heads. The feminists were up in arms over Mapplethorpe's work.

Liberals are already against pornography. Feminists are against it. The nuture vs nature crowd is against it. They have years of research to show that pornography is damaging not only to children but women in general is already out there. I'm not sure why Rebbecca feels the need to roll out new research.

But, as with conservatives, the liberals are split on the pornography issue. Mary Carey got invited to a White House press dinner. Have you ever been? Conservatives have long had a "nod, nod, wink, wink" support of pornography. Especially the libertarian crowd. The libertarians believe you should be able to smoke, ride a motorcycle without a helmet, and look at pornography. That's what freedom means. The conservatives also have a capitalism crowd which supports pornography because in the "supply" and "demand" crowd the appropriate way to handle things will supply is to get people to voluntarily quit demand, not enforce it.

So conservatives and liberals alike have pornography sympathizers in their mist. If conservatives and feminists, err, liberals could find it in their hearts to actually come together on this issue they may be able to overcome the sympathizers.



drivebyposting
"Video gaming has a far more addictive and deter mental effect on children than pornography yet Republicans have nothing to say on the subject because God doesn't prohibit it. "

This issue has nothing to do with party. I as a parent regulate my child's video gaming and it wasn't because some Democrat or Republican "cared".

Addictions are bad. While you are correct that the effect of excessive video gaming is detrimental to children mentally (most especially violent and sexual games), I would submit that pornography is worse in its effects. Its viewing is producing pedophiles, perverts, and adulteries. It is breaking up families, by breaking the hearts of husbands, wives, and children.

"The Bible doesn't prohibit lead pipes ergo in today's world if the same situation applied to American as Rome conservatives would ignore the problem and liberals would be sounding the alarm. "

The scriptures don't list every possible contingency, nor should they. We receive from them principles of living that will keep us safe. We don't need it to tell us everything, but know enough of what it does tell us that we can figure it out and act wisely. It is impossible, impractical, and often unnecessary to have to have thorough government funded scientific studies before we see the wisdom in avoiding these vices. It doesn't take a PhD to see the effect of these things first hand. Academics have a tendency to try to add unnecessary complexity to issues to keep everyone thinking they are smart.

This isn't a liberal/conservative issue
The main problem with this is that calls for taking a stand on pornography is asking America to give up its favorite vice.

Same thing as trying to get a jury to convict a drunk driver case. It's hard because the majority of Americans say...there but for the grace of God go I...Who hasn't at some time or another gotten behind the wheel after a drink or two?

The other problem is it is a subjective determination, but still could be defined in such a way as to regulate it.

If we can regulate cigarettes, lead in gasoline, air quality, FDA and the like, we should be able to regulate pornography to mitigate its ubiquitous nature that leads to 'accidental'(on purpose) exposure of same to children.

It should be pay per view, licensed or otherwise regulated so that it can be for 'adults only.'

I don't, for one, believe this would eliminate the problem, but it would help a lot.

This is NOT a victimless crime.

other horrors
"talisman wrote: While you're at it, how about protecting children from the other horrors of this world"

I'd assume he was refering to protecting children from Nazis. Don't know of anything as horrifying as homosexuals Adolph Hitler and Janet Reno "frying" children, their mothers & fathers.

'Right' On!

While your at it, let's have the Heritage Foundation muster the courage to protect families by targeting those "public" officials who pervert our constitution. Amen.

For Rebbecca, Part I
Here is an interesting research topic for Rebbecca.

Are romance novels pornography for women?

I bring this up because back in 1990 I took a liberal, feminist literature course with that exact title, "Are Romance Novels Pornography For Women".

I was expecting some feminist rant but got instead an enlightenment.

1.) Pornography has been classified a mental health problem for years. The same psychiatric institutes that claim homosexuality is no longer a mental health problem do still recognize poronography as a mental disorder.

2.) Feminists hate romance novels. Why? I had never read one but here are the facts. Romance novels by and large are NOT allowed on the NYT best sellers list because if they were they'd own the list. While the pale in comparison to sales with pornography, romance novels outsell all other books. It is a dirty little secret that the NYT will not disclose. Further, romance novels almost allows involve a rake. A guy who rapes a woman at a young age and then later on they meet again and the book climaxes with a marriage between a woman and a man who had raped her.

3.) Feminists wanted to scientifically link romance novels to pornography because pornography had long been classified by the medial community as a source of mental illness. Feminists really wanted romance novels declared pornography so they could be called a source of mental illness. Feminists wanted an alarmed sounded to do away with romance novels.



For Rebbecca, Part II
At the end of the class the conclusion by the medical community was that there was no link. Romance novels could not called a source of mental illness due to a common effect shared with pornography.

Lessons learned? Pornography has a long, long history of being classified mental health illness.

That's how far down the pornography rabbit hole the feminists were going. There is no need for "new research". The medical community has long held that pornography is mental illness, so much so the feminists in the late 1980s were using the bedrock of accepted fact to condemn romance novels. There is no need to reinvent the wheel or drum up new research.

To there credit, feminists stuck to the medical facts and never rolled out their anti-romance novel campaign. But not for the lack of trying.

Child porn != porn
Child porn is a nasty business that hurts real children. You will find vast super-majorities against its production and dissemination. Why? Because real children are hurt during the filming of these movies.

Ordinary porn (pop? plain old porn?) involves no one being harmed. Women and men make the adult decision to perform in it and adults make the choice to purchase it, download it, view it etc.

This article starts out with some gut-wrenching headlines involving children and child porn and then goes onto talk about the theoretical harm of ordinary porn.

When I saw that bait and switch I viewed the rest of the article with a much more jaundiced eye.

As for the attitudinal differences of people who viewed porn, some of them may simply reflect a closer look at reality. Certainly a cynical attitude toward love strikes me as a much realer attitude than a naive attitude toward love.

a_cermak
You need to do a little more research into the adverse effects of Porn. It isn't as simplistic as your "involves no one being harmed" attitude.

a_cermak
"Ordinary porn (pop? plain old porn?) involves no one being harmed. "

Ordinary porn is a nasty business that hurts real children. It warps the mind with unrealistic expectations, disappointment, feeds a temptation to cheat on a spouse (as if the porn itself isn't already cheating) and is a jump off point to perversions, rape, and sexual abuse. One thing leads to another and often ordinary pornography leads to child pornography. Marriages die, souls are damned, and families are broken up all the time because of it. Ask the wives and children of porn widows if no one is being harmed.

Gee whizzzzzzzz
Same old, same old from the same posters. Is porn a problem? Sure just look at the internet. Over a decade ago a Republican was running for Congress in South Carolina. It was disclosed that he was a big investor in an Internet Website. He had to withdraw. But became a bigwig at the Pentagon.

cermak
You stoll my thunder.
Well, kudos to you for pointing out the both the bait and switch and the most significant aspect of the issue.

Summing it up.
Ms Hagelin could have saved the time and space her article took up by simply stating the entire issue as she did in her final paragraph.
All the rhetoric and hysteria aside:
"Mom and Dad, you are responsible for protecting your children..."

Alex, et al
Saying that porn harms children by being exposed to something they have no right or business being exposed to is like saying cigarettes harm children, or alcohol harms children.

Independent Thinker
"Saying that porn harms children by being exposed to something they have no right or business being exposed to is like saying cigarettes harm children, or alcohol harms children. "

Cigarettes and alcohol harm both parents and children all the time, don't they? If the parent is a chronic drunk who forgets his family or abuses them, I would call that harm. Porn is not unlike that. Just because something is legal doesn't make it good.

Prohibition Again
Approximately 15 percent of the population is alcoholic, but because alcohol was deemed evil it was constitutionally prohibited from 1920 to 1933 in the USA (other western countries had similar experiences). Demand, however, never totally waned, and what was once a commodity that could be regulated by the government became a black market commodity that produced the likes of Al Capone and the rest of gangland.

We see this very same situation in the war on drugs; the government continues to attempt to prevent suppliers from meeting demand, and we have gang bangers shooting competitors and chopping each other up with machetes to protect their turf. Mothers of dealers collect their dying children's pagers to pass along to the next kid because the illegal drug trade is so lucrative.

I have no idea how many people actually become mentally unstable due to overexposure to pornography, but the $12+ billion figure suggests that there's lots of porn being consumed without the whole country going mad, so I submit that it is a small segment of the population cannot handle its consumption. So, to deprive the rest of the population of porn because a small segment can't handle it is likely to produce a similar result as prohibition and the current drug war.

In other words, if you think porn is bad for you and your kids, keep you and yours away from it. For the rest of the population that can handle it and has no problem with it, mind your own business. If someone commits a crime, whether due to porn, drugs, or alcohol, they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

But to suggest that porn is the cause of all perversion is akin to saying the handgun is the cause of armed robbery. I somehow doubt too many on TH will buy that proposition.

Independent Thinker
Your analogy does not hold water. Exposure to cigarettes and alcohol are physical items that can be harmful to children.

How do you shield a child's mind from images?

From a personal standpoint, I have accidentally viewed some pornographic pictures that I still cannot scrub from my mind, and wish that I could.

It is a given that parents have responsibility...but so does society in dealing with the dirty little secret (pun intended) that no one wants to admit to or discuss.

drive by poster
what are you talking about with video games. there is that irrational nut jack thompson who is all over the place trying to ban video games.

yes video games can be addictive so can watching TV, exersise, eatting or anything for that matter and all can be dangerous or damaging.

ps over eatting actually contribues more to obisety then video games as it is easier to cut caloires out of your diet then it is to burn off fat on your body.

some parents not being resposible means we should ban video games for all and you say the porn ban is unresaonable. i may have to do reasearch but the video game industry is far larger than the porn indusrty maybe not in sales but in over all number of customers so be careful what you say

Galltegfa
"But to suggest that porn is the cause of all perversion is akin to saying the handgun is the cause of armed robbery. "

I am not suggesting that. The person who acts on the pornography is the pervert just as the armed robber is the criminal. I am saying that porn is a fertile breeding ground for perversions that happen to be addictive. Because of its combined addictive and destructive fruits, its use, if any, should be carefully guarded and its access restricted so as to minimize exposure to the population. You should have to be looking for it to find it. As it is now, the industry targets a population that is young and can be easily captivated, addicted, and lives destroyed before they have solidly developed sufficient self control.

Now does all of this mean that I am just going to complain and do nothing myself. Heavens, no! I am protecting my children, but it gets more and more difficult to do that with the media inundation of images and media. My family doesn't even support it financially and we still have to be on the watch all the time. It is like a cancer.

Targeting Youth
I think that there may be some sexual predators who are using porn to attract under-aged targets, but I will need more proof than an assertion to concede that the bulk of the porn/adult entertainment industry is actively attempting to get minors hooked on their product. There's no shortage of willing adult consumers out there ($12+ billion and growing), so the need to go prospecting for under age customers strikes me as exceedingly remote.

Cigarettes and Alcohol are Regulated
To purchase cigarettes or alcohol, you have to go to a store, show an ID, and pay for these items. This system protects minors. Thus, even if the parents are not there to stop the transaction, laws require stores to do so. Why don't libs argue that these laws are silly because it is the parents responsiblity to protect their children?

To view porn, all you need is computer, an internet connection and about 3 mouse clicks. Millions of internet connected computers are in use in America. Thus, if parents are not hovering 24/7, children can get access to porn at home, or at the neighbors house, etc. Why are there no societal protections against this situation, which is akin to protecting minors from booze and smokes?

Galltegfa
Porn Industry (web traffic)
23 to 60 MILLION unique visitors to porn sites DAILY.

51% of all P2P videos are porn, and 73% of all image searches on P2P engine Kazaa are porn with 24% of that Child Porn.

web page growth:
1998: 14 Million
2003: 260 Million
2004: 420 MILLION

70% in-room movie revenue at hotels-porn
25-30% of all Pay-per-view revnues.
Western Europe CELL PHONE Porn: $1.5 BILLION

This exponential growth is already outdated.
Read.

Stats of last post from
SALVO Issue 2 Spring 2007

Mrs Paddy
What's your point?

If I'm not mistaken, all of the instances you offer above require the purchaser to have a credit card or some kind of account. Maybe the first step to preventing your kids from getting into porn is to take away their credit cards.

Galltegfa
"I will need more proof than an assertion to concede that the bulk of the porn/adult entertainment industry is actively attempting to get minors hooked on their product. "

They don't have to do much more to attract minors than they do to attract adults, because it is the same advertising for both. You don't have to package it any differently. Smut is smut. All you have to do to target the underage is to make access to it much easier to get.

"There's no shortage of willing adult consumers out there ($12+ billion and growing), so the need to go prospecting for under age customers strikes me as exceedingly remote. "

That is the sad part, and you are correct. Without parental involvement, no regulation will be enough.

Smokes & booze are tangible items
Smokes and booze are real things you must purchase so it is easy to require an ID to buy them. Porn is more like an idea because it is in the same form that videos about the Spitzer telescope or videos about pollination is in. So it is much harder to block all porn from getting everywhere on line. Most of it is practically blocked however, because most of it requires a credit card to view. Since no sane parent gives their underage child a credit card, that should be no problem. There's some mild stuff that is available as teasers and there is absolutely, by the nature of it, no control on what's offered p2p. But then again, there's hate lit out there in cyberspace, there's a lot of ideas I consider appalling out there. The question is, do you strangle the freedom available on the net just so some people can feel more comfortable?

Alex 1
I'm 50 years old. If I want to buy some porn, why should I jump through hoops because you can't trust your kids to behave when you're not around?

Galltegfa
My post was to illustrate the growth industry.

Are you trying to tell me that the only porn out there is accessible only with a credit card?

Surely you jest.

If that were the case there wouldn't be an issue because then it would be easier to regulate and prevent exposure to children.

It's not so great for adults, either, but I'm sure that falls on deaf ears.

Galltegfa
It has nothing to do with trust. It has to do with the effect of chronic exposure to pornographic images that I am concerned about. I can trust them to handle their exposure to an infrequent random exposure to a pornographic image just fine. It is the relative frequency of that exposure that I don't trust anybody to handle. Every pervert says he is able to "handle" pornography just fine. Some assurance that is to those that have to deal with the aftermath of sexual addictions, broken families, sexual abuse and rape. It is the rest of the family and society that can't handle it. So yes, I think that you should have to jump through a few hoops to get access to your porn.

MEMORIES FROM A TIME LONG PAST

.....Rebecca ...

...When I was a child the only protection I got from predators was advise from relatives, "Don't talk to strangers."

...TV was in its infancy and my favorite show was "Howdy Doody" ...

...There was no Internet ...Playboy or Adult Book stores ...

...There was no sex-ed in school but by the time I was 15 I knew everything about sex that was worth knowing and I learned it in the time honored manner ...on the street from the older kids ...

.....Condoms (Trojans) were available in drug stores but you had to be 18 to buy them ...you could get the older guys to buy them for you but they wouldnt do you much good because 95 percent of the girls in school, to use the vernacular of the day, didn't "put out" ...

.....And the 5 percent that did were such skanks that they were called three baggers ...two bags to put over her head (in case the first one broke) and one for your head in case they both broke ...

.....If there were sex predators and deviants in those days I was unaware of it as were all my friends ...

.....Where have you gone Joe Dimaggio .....COLOSSUS

Mrs Paddy
You make my point for me. It is a growth industry, meaning there's no shortage of paying customers for the product. Why give away something for which there are plenty of paying customers? With so much growth, I suspect the problem is keeping supply up with demand, not the other way 'round. Sorry, I'm not convinced that there's a problem here, other than parents cannot seem to prevent their children from peeping at forbidden materials. Perhaps that's because making something the forbidden fruit heightens the temptation. Maybe if parents didn't get so worked up at the prospect of their children finding porn, the temptation would subside.

If memory serves, I encountered my first porn in junior high school. I didn't suddenly turn into a rapist or someone's sex slave; I didn't quit the church; I didn't suddenly become an alcoholic (that happened in college), drug addict, or a sex addict. I don't know whether my kids got into porn or not, but they seem to be in healthy relationships and do not exhibit any detectable perversions and appear to be otherwise sexually normal. So, from what I've seen and experienced, porn's role in perversion or addiction is coincidental. Perhaps it's the other way 'round: perverts and deviants are attracted to porn.

Alex 1
So, I should have to prove that I'm not a pervert to buy a legal product because someone else can't handle it or because your kids might disobey you?

I guess you have no problem with gun control laws then. People with no prior criminal record should be made to wait until some bureaucracy says it's okay for them to defend themselves? (Let's hope the ex honors the restraining order in the meantime...)

Maybe we should make people take some kind of sanity test before selling them a car or issuing them a drivers license to ensure that they don't intentionally run someone down.

Or how about before selling them a cell phone so they don't use it as a remote trigger on a bomb?

Sounds like a free society to me.

Dr. Judith Reisman is a quack
Don't go quoting Dr. Judith Reisman on anything.

She is a typical crank: She has done NO controlled scientific experiments or actual biochemical research on her own, yet she goes around spinning theories about "erototoxic" chemicals in the brain, for which there is no scientific evidence.

Her work is full of rank speculation and personal (and false) invective against Kinsey. But try asking Dr. Reisman for a list of papers she has published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. It's a VERY short list, believe me.

Even if you're concerned about porn, don't quote pseudo-scientific cranks like Reisman to make your case. You will be a laughingstock in the scientific community.

Pornography is here to stay
Thanks to the Internet, it is now impossible to ban pornography.

Even child pornography.

Porn sites can be set up with any Internet Service Provider in any country on earth, and provide instant access to the rest of the world. For years now, the FBI and Interpol have been engaged in a constant and hopeless game of Whack-A-Mole with the child pornographers, running from one Third World country to another, shutting down child porn websites in one Third World country only to have them spring up again the following week in another country.

Barring United Nations action to control content on the Internet (which I would be VEHEMENTLY opposed to on principle), I see no way to fix that.

We will have to find ways to reduce the harm from pornography, since we can no longer control the supply. Modern computers and telecommunications have made effective control impossible.

Galltegfa
"So, I should have to prove that I'm not a pervert to buy a legal product because someone else can't handle it or because your kids might disobey you? "

No, just register you as a porn user and provide you with a key. Kind of like a driver's license.

"I guess you have no problem with gun control laws then. "

I do have a problem with gun control laws. We have the right to keep and bear arms by the second amendment of the Constitution. It is a necessary check on governmental power.

The same rights are not necessarily guaranteed to porn. Pornographers are not defending themselves.

Galltegfa
The whole idea of a key is that you have to want to get porn in order to use porn.

My idea is this: The only ones not allowed to get a key are those underage and those who, after getting a key, were convicted of a sex crime, rape, spousal abuse, etc. If you don't want access, don't stand in line and get a key. The key will allow access to any porn of any kind whatsoever with no strings attached (no background checks on sites, unlimited access to any kind of porn whatsoever). There will be no censorship of porn sites at all for those who have a key. The porn sites will operate absolutely freely as long as they are registered.

I like the idea, because I don't want a key to begin with. I don't want to be advertised to.

child porn
Many years ago my familymlived in suburban D.C.
I was a young teen-ager when 2 girls and I (a girl) stopped for a milk shake after the Saturday afternoon movie.

A teen age boy asked to join us and ended coming to my house with us.

Two days later the paper had an article saying he had committed suicide.

He was a Page. I will never know why he did that. Was it seeing a real family? Did he have a problem with an adult at work? Who Knows???

Digger

Bob C
"Uh Huh. You mean like Gary Studds, Barney Frank and Mark Foley among many other Dems?"

Uh, since I was referring to Republicans, I meant Larry Craig and Ken Mehlman. God knows how many more closets cases they have in their ranks.

My message to closet case Republicans is: Closets are for gowns, darlings! Come out and be fabulous!

Mary C.

The real issue here is....
Parents need to be parents. That entails blocking your computers and doing whatever it takes to monitor your children's exposure to porn. This your YOUR job, not the government's. We have already been down this road with Tipper Gore and the rap music lyrics.

Child porn is already illegal to own or even view (note to those who cruise the web sites-you are being monitored!)

The adult use of porn is not illegal. Do we really need yet another government interfence into our personal lives?

I am sick to death of yet another lazy Baby Boomer parent lamenting that the government needs to step in and do his/her job. Keep the damn government out of our lives as much as posible pu-lease!

Mary C.

Digger
"Two days later the paper had an article saying he had committed suicide.

He was a Page. I will never know why he did that. Was it seeing a real family? Did he have a problem with an adult at work? Who Knows???"

It could have been the usual teenage drama. Suicide is one of the leading cause of deaths in that age group, especially in boys.

Mary C.

Porn is good for you!!
Well, actually I don't think there is ANYONE who will make that claim. Peering at such stuff when one could and should be building actual relationships with actual people is simply *not good*.

Is that a sufficient justification for banning it? Not in and of itself. It's one of several pretty good reasons for not *using* it, however.

And I don't even mention spiritual impact, though I have opinions on that, as well.

Does porn make perverts? Dunno for certain, but I am thoroughly convinced that it can *only* increase any given individual's tendency towards perversity.

And parents *certainly* have no excuse for not making every conceivable effort to keep it away from their kids. Whatever the cost in personal convenience and time.

Excuses. Excuses.
Dear Miss Hagelin:

Isn't it amazing at all justifications and diversions that liberals can come up with to prevent action on a point of decency that's so basic? How many times have we heard children described by them as "little adults" and "sexual beings"? They believe this! In fact, they must embrace this degradation of children's souls so to uphold their nonvalues toward society, God, the sanctity of life and themselves.

Your basic point is clear. Pornography is a form of brainwashing. It devalues every morally uplifting and ennobling concept that decent human beings hold dear. It appeals to everyone's basal nature and, when as pervasive as it has become, proves thereby irresistable to even the best of us on occasion. It siphons billions from our pockets and, in the process, promotes human misery... both directly and indirectly.

But it's worst offense (as you have correctly pointed out) is that against the hearts and minds of impressionable children. The attacks come from everywhere, now, and parents are largely helpless to contain it. It's not just the mammoth porn industry per se, but the entire entertainment industry as well. The legacy of "Hounddog" continues unabated. Laws ARE needed and prosecutors must be diligent. The power of the corruptors is too great.

tut tut...
Well, one thing is for sure...objectification of sex and women IS unhealthy. This isn't a partisan issue, it's a HUMAN one. However, the usual suspects will rail and rant against those who are honest and open about their consumption, while others want to enact laws as if they don't indulge behind their own doors doing 'research'.

I've had enough of the lack of perspective and proportion when it comes to porn or child porn.
Social and gender bias makes little inroads into reaching the right targets for the right reasons. It certainly frustrates those of us in law enforcement.
And doesn't punish the deserving. For example, how little anyone is motivated to punish WOMEN pedophiles when they initiate young boys.

Once there is some real dialogue to get at the heart of it all, instead of fingerpointing, the issue wouldn't grow to such a monster.
Not that porn is anything new. It's been with us since ancient times and since man could paint on cave walls.

Nuts to that!
Absolutely moronic understanding of sexuality. The idea that pornography is "addictive" in a manner similar to heroin or morphine ought to make anyone double over with laughter. The will to eradicate any and all intimations of sexual desire from the public square is itself a pornographic crusade. Where did Hagelin get her credentials?

Critical thinking skills...
YES!!!! Right on Becky! Preach it!
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.