Anthony D'Amato, Leighton Professor of Law argues that the availablity of Porn on the internet is responsible for the incidence of rape declining by 85% in the last 25 years. If his claim is true is this sufficient justification for lifting restrictions of porn?
2006-10-17 08:25:27 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Gender Studies
http://www.melonfarmers.co.uk/pdfs/pornup.pdf
2006-10-17 08:33:54 · update #1
I'm curious as to what restrictions he feels need lifting. Currently porn is freely available to anyone with internet access or access to most bookstores and newstands.
I won't argue that it's a "pressure release" for lonely men, so it serves a social purpose, but to correlate that with rape statistics? I think someone is trying to align themselves with feminist groups for whatever reason. This is the kind of crap that was common in the 70's.
And incidentally, I think murder is a "worse" crime.
2006-10-17 09:18:09 · answer #1 · answered by roberticvs 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I would say one of the major reasons the incidence of rape has gone down in the last 25 years is because it has been a major cause of the women's movement in the ensuing years. Major publicity has been given to it in that time. Men, slowly but surely, as a whole, have come to recognize rape is a crime against another person and is not tolerated as it once was in the good ol' days.
From what I have understood, porn has been a contributing factor in the incidence of rape among people who were not associated with each other before the crime. In other words, anonymous attackers of women were likely to have been viewers of porn before the initial attack on a victim. First it puts the thought into their heads, then they act on it.
Porn is a bit more available today than it was 25 years ago because of the advent of the internet. But I don't believe the two necessarily correspond to each other.
Porn is okay in small amounts, and I hesitate to even agree to that. But, much of the time it becomes an addiction. No addiction is good, in any form. Especially one which can lead to such dreadful consequences for other people besides the addict.
2006-10-17 21:04:14 · answer #2 · answered by Slimsmom 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Sounds like you're both just a couple of porn hounds. And what restrictions should be lifted? So long as you're 18, you can get whatever you want. (And then it's not so hard even if you're underage.) And the statistics I find totally unbelievable. These are simply not true. There have have actually been several studies that show the opposite to be true. And lastly...what feminists? I don't think any feminist has ever said this (Murder, of course, being worse). If so, name them. I'm sure you can't.
2006-10-18 03:10:15 · answer #3 · answered by wendy g 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
IF his conclusion were true, and IF pornography had no other negative effects, then yes that would be sufficient justification. I haven't studied his work, but I have a hard time believing that rape occurred 7 times more often in 1980 than it does now. The next consideration is that pornography is NOT a "victimless crime", and that many of the participants are either chemically or financially forced into it. Encouraging the spread of pornography increases the market and production of it, and will encourage more women to become involved in a profession that is degrading for themselves and women everywhere.
2006-10-17 16:25:51 · answer #4 · answered by John C 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I consider myself a feminist (or perhaps more accurately a post-modern neo-feminist). I am not against pornography at all.
However, I am not sure about the professor's claims--I would have to look at them in detail as well as the supporting statistics. Making a causal connection of that nature is always suspect.
If you are interested in some of my recent comments about pornography from a female perspective look at: http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-GgIFACYzfqWx8YwvtspSWVmWzA--?cq=1&p=3451
2006-10-17 20:19:04 · answer #5 · answered by beckychr007 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would really like to see additional studies supporting such a declaration. After all, rape isn't about sexual release. It's about power over women and about the way women are treated. I mean, jeez, guys, would you really want to put a woman through such a traumatic event just to get off? That's what God created lube for!
2006-10-17 17:44:19 · answer #6 · answered by random6x7 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
no. people need to know that no means no. as for restrictions on porn, that's a matter of opinion. i feel porn is for everyone that wants to view it and that shouldn't be the business of anyone but their own!
2006-10-17 16:39:58 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He's just a pervert, possibly even a pedophile, that wants to exploit as much women and/or children through pornography as possible.
2006-10-17 16:36:42 · answer #8 · answered by woman_of_tomorrow 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋