Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!nike!cit-vax!elroy!smeagol!usc-oberon!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen From: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,net.legal Subject: Re: Attorney General's Commission on Pornography Message-ID: <1438@psivax.UUCP> Date: Tue, 16-Sep-86 15:59:21 EDT Article-I.D.: psivax.1438 Posted: Tue Sep 16 15:59:21 1986 Date-Received: Fri, 19-Sep-86 21:40:41 EDT References: <1487@mtx5a.UUCP> <2219@milano.UUCP> Reply-To: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) Distribution: net Organization: Pacesetter Systems Inc., Sylmar, CA Lines: 118 Xref: mnetor talk.politics.misc:161 net.legal:3589 In article <2219@milano.UUCP> wex@milano.UUCP writes: >> Pornography is a medical and public health problem because people, >> particularly women and children, are abused in the production of certain >> pornographic materials. > >This paragraph is largely an exercise in anecdotal evidence. That is, >there are no studies indicating how pervasive or frequent this is. Rather, >the commissioners heard "case histories" and "personal stories." Ther is also the more important issue of how closely such incedents are tied to the production of pornography. Even if such things are prevalent in the pornography industry as it exist in the US today, it is *not* clear that they truly result from the production of pornograpy in and of itself. It is in fact more likely that they can occur because the pornography industry is an underground industry, largely beyond the power of government. Thus, to me such anecdotes are actually evidence in *favor* of legalizing pornography! Then the existing labor protection laws could be applied more easily. And many of the other associations between pornography and harmful activities(below) could be reduced. What distributer or retailer is going to risk losing his business license by permitting such things when he is making so much money in a *legal* business? Right now they have little reason to be so careful, they are already breaking the law! >> Pornography is a medical and public health problem because >> pornographic retail outlets of the "adults only" variety sell products >> under the pretext of health and recreation that are the instruments of >> injury, both intentional and unintentional. >> Pornography is a medical and public health problem because >> pornographic retail outlets of the "adults only" variety are the most >> visible service stations of the vice industry. >> Pornography is a medical and public health problem because >> it encourages patterns of social behavior which have adverse health >> consequences. The person who follows the patterns of social behavior >> promoted by pornography is a person for whom love, affection, marriage, >> procreation, and responsibility are absolutely irrelevant to sexual >> conduct. >Here we have a conjunction of two previously-mentioned problems. There is >no evidence for pornography encouraging any sort of behavior. >And it occurs to me that, if there were such persons, what >concern is that of the government? Quite! Especially that last! This is supposed to be a free country, not a theocracy, so what business is it of the government if some citizens chose such a life style. After all it is *their* loss if they lose out on love and affection, not the government's. >> The social science evidence adequately demonstrates that even in >> experimental samples of mentally stable male college students, exposure to >> violent pornography leads to measurable, negative changes in the content of >> sexual fantasies, attitudes toward women... > >What evidence? Here the doctor is clearly failing to separate phenomena. >A violent reaction (or attitude change) could be the result of several things: > 1) the exposure to scenes of violence, > 2) the exposure to pornographic (or erotic) scenes, > 3) the exposure to the combination of 1 & 2, > 4) subject frustration at having to answer stupid questions > when his libido is up and he wants to go out and get laid. Let me add a couple more: 5) subject was reacting out of redirected guilt feelings stemming from childhood indoctrination against sexual feelings. 6) subject was playing a joke on researcher. (probably not important, but such things *do* happen) I believe that #5, or some close variant on it, may well be a major factor in these findings. I am finding as I examine myself that most of the time when I lose my temper it is due to redirected guilt or similar feelings of personal inadequacy. In my case most of this comes from my perfectionism, but it is easy to see that sexual guilt could be just as powerful in this regard. >> ...the existing population-based evidence for the United States shows a >> correlation between circulation rates of magazines containing pornography >> (primarily of a non-violent type) and rates of reported rape in the fifty >> states during that time, even after many other factors were statistically >> controlled. >Second, rates of reported rape are not evenly distributed over the >population. For example, the per capita incidence of all violent crimes >(including rape) is higher in areas of high population density. (Studies >with rats indicate that crowding stress may be a factor.) A higher >population density would tend to increase magazine circulation (through >higher availability and more acceptance). You do not go far enough, the rates of violent crimes also vary substantially from one *neighborhood* to the next! Right now sales of pornographic materials are largely restricted to those areas where the crime rate would be high anyway, due to such sales being itself a crime. I am far from convinced that the cited correlation would hold up if pornography were legalized. As a matter of fact, I looked at one of the studies mentioned. It was one of the worst pieces of statistical garbage I have ever seen! The unit of study was the *state*; not even the city, let alone the neighborhood!?!? And the statistical control of "other factors" was inadequate, to say the least. Only a few, rather naive, alternative models were adjusted for. *Nothing* in the study adjusted for the illegality of pornography and the effect that would have on its distribution. There was no attempt to make time based correlations to seperate cause and effect(i.e. they forgot to find out which came first, the rise in crime rate or the increase in sales of pornography). If that study is typical of the ones the Meese Commision used in the above conclusion, the very correlation is doubtful. --- Sarima (Stanley Friesen) UUCP: {ttidca|ihnp4|sdcrdcf|quad1|nrcvax|bellcore|logico}!psivax!friesen ARPA: ??