Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Does Porn Hurt Children?

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 69 posts

Re: Does Porn Hurt Children?

#51

Post by aaronem »

DanBC wrote: post #30
cstross wrote: post #4

Minor nit wrt. the first paragraph: the UK's mandatory "family-friendly filters" only apply to consumer internet accounts. It's possible to get a BT Infinity business account without any company letterhead or ID -- it just costs a bit more (and a provides a better quality of service, with no net nanny in the way because your IT department is supposed to do that for you). And there are ISPs (Andrews and Arnold -- http…

I agree that internet filtering is a broken idea. But there are people who think that porn does change behaviour. They might. Have a point - hairlessness seems to have come from porn. While it's weird that breasts are displayed in a national newspaper (not because they're breasts, but because that paper is so judgemental about s lot of things. See also Daily Mail "all grown up" while shreKing about paedophiles) unclo…

> hairlessness seems to have come from porn

I've seen a lot of just-so stories on this subject. Has anyone got any evidence to show?

Re: Does Porn Hurt Children?

#52

Post by agumonkey »

aaronem wrote: post #47
agumonkey wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is your social life ? I'd be worried for people who only see sexual relationships, and somehow all relationships through cheaply crafted pornography.

I'd be inclined to wonder, first, whether there are people who "only see &c., &c., through cheaply crafted pornography,", and, second, whether that's the fault of said cheaply crafted pornography, or whether instead you're mixing up your correlation with your causation. I mean, if all you know about someone is that he has no good taste either in personal relationships or in pornography, you can't safely assume that t…

I meant that there are people who never had any physical relationships whatsoever with other people and only know about it through videos. Also, I didn't really mean to pass judgement on porn, but I think we can agree that most of nowadays porn is a very cheap product (both in price and in ideas) from an industry. AFAIK in the 80s it was less so, hence I'd grade them less cheap. I don't see where I implied any causation.

If I may rephrase the question: what are the effect on a growing mind whose only experience about intimate/sexual relationship is alone watching videos.

Re: Does Porn Hurt Children?

#53

Post by meric »

aaronem wrote: post #42
meric wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Porn is not physically addictive." Oh but it can be addictive . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornography_addiction

Anything that provokes a dopamine dump can be addictive. What's your point?

It's disingenuous to suggest it's "not physically addictive", it makes it sound like there's no danger of addiction, yet there is actually a significant portion of the population who when consuming porn regularly do get addicted, just like cigarettes.

Re: Does Porn Hurt Children?

#54

Post by vertex-four »

aaronem wrote: post #50
vertex-four wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how do we give kids the mental tools to understand the difference between porn and real relationships/sex, and at roughly what stage of development? That's what I want to see research on, personally. Blocking porn isn't going to help; learning how to teach kids to successfully maintain a concrete barrier between porn and the real world is.

Every kid (ideally) learns the difference between "real" and "not real", and, more subtly, the difference between "valid example" and "don't trust this, it lies" (e.g., most television, which is exaggerated for effect). I've seen plenty of assertions that porn is a special case for which the general lesson doesn't suffice, but never yet run across a supporting argument which didn't reduce to "well, because genitals a…

I'd disagree that most people can successfully differentiate between most TV and the real world. If they could, we wouldn't be in the mess we are where mainstream media gets to define political discourse, as people would take what the TV and newspapers say with a grain of salt.

In any case, porn has the issue in that it's "secret", and not discussed with adults with experience in the subject like most things are. It's also usually discovered well before any experiences with actual sex.

I posit that because it's not discussed with adults with a more experience mindset, kids do not have a framework to understand how it relates to the real world; they don't usually even know what sex in the real world is from an emotional standpoint (and usually not really from a technical standpoint either).

That is, I posit that the way we understand things, and the way they affect us, depends heavily on how we discuss them, and past experience. If we don't discuss sex, and we have no past experience of sex, then how are we supposed to process something which appears to be a depiction of sex?

Re: Does Porn Hurt Children?

#55

Post by barry-cotter »

DanBC wrote: post #32
barry-cotter wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. My (currently hypothetical) children will grow up with as few barriers to consuming unsavoury weirdness as I did. I'll be doing it deliberately though.

So long as you're aware that some people (not me) will see that as abuse, and will report you to child protective services. The line "i don't have any evidence of harm" will be weak, because laws exist to prevent children under 18 from having access to porn.

Yeah, fuck 'em. If reading Stephen King and Stephen Donaldson as a teenager didn't do me any damage porn certainly wasn't going to.

Re: Does Porn Hurt Children?

#56

Post by JulianMorrison »

adnam wrote: post #36
JulianMorrison wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who are you gonna believe, peer reviewed research or your own lyin' eyes? If you pick "eyes", you lack understanding of the strength of evidence and the fallibility of in-person observation.

If you pick "peer reviewed research" you probably never held your own newborn child in your arms, promising you'd do anything to protect them, and secretly wishing they never grow old. And perhaps you overestimate the strength of evidence.

Cute anecdata is still anecdata. Congrats, you experienced the internal sensation of parent-child bonding. This is not evidence.

Re: Does Porn Hurt Children?

#57

Post by [deleted] »

adnam wrote: post #38
Consultant32452 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just bought my daughter a Chromebook for her 7th birthday. I seriously doubt she's looking for anything unsavory at this age but I let her use it unsupervised and don't intend to start supervising her in the future.

I hope no one sends her the link to imgur/spacedicks.

[deleted]

Re: Does Porn Hurt Children?

#58

Post by [deleted] »

adnam wrote: post #38
Consultant32452 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just bought my daughter a Chromebook for her 7th birthday. I seriously doubt she's looking for anything unsavory at this age but I let her use it unsupervised and don't intend to start supervising her in the future.

I hope no one sends her the link to imgur/spacedicks.

[deleted]

Re: Does Porn Hurt Children?

#59

Post by rmc »

leaveyou wrote: post #15
rmc wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong with BDSM? You say it like "practicing BDSM" is a bad thing.

because BDSM hurts ? (I really don't know, I only guess that's why the OP used BDSM as an example)

Childbirth hurts. Does that mean it's bad and no-one should ever do it? Lots of sports hurt!

I suspect the OP used BDSM because many view it as "perverted", as "bad sex", as "something people shouldn't do". The hell with that. All consenting sex amoung adults in private is fine and ethical and normal.

Re: Does Porn Hurt Children?

#60

Post by adnam »

JulianMorrison wrote: post #56
adnam wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you pick "peer reviewed research" you probably never held your own newborn child in your arms, promising you'd do anything to protect them, and secretly wishing they never grow old. And perhaps you overestimate the strength of evidence.

Cute anecdata is still anecdata. Congrats, you experienced the internal sensation of parent-child bonding. This is not evidence.

My point is it's not just a question of evidence.
Post reply on HN