Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!gatech!akgua!lcuxlm!whuxl!whuts!orb
From: orb@whuts.UUCP (SEVENER)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,net.legal,net.singles
Subject: Re: Attorney General's Commission on Pornography
Message-ID: <988@whuts.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 12-Sep-86 09:39:32 EDT
Article-I.D.: whuts.988
Posted: Fri Sep 12 09:39:32 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 13-Sep-86 21:01:35 EDT
References: <777@mtund.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 38
Xref: mnetor talk.politics.misc:73 net.legal:3539 net.singles:10278

> Mark Terribile (mtx5b!mark) writes:
> > Assuming that non-psychotic male college students are representative of
> > normal people (a point that no one has yet seen fit to argue, although it's
> > a good one) the studies which showed an increased willingness to cause another
> > person pain or to disregard the sexual rights of women after the subjects had
> > viewed a couple hours of such material suggest that these things may happen,
> > and that at the very least we should fund further studies and (where it may be
> > done within the limits of scientific ethics) further experiments to find out
> > more.  (And yes, the Commission recommends this.)  $500 000 is just not enough
> > to answer these questions properly.
> 
> The study Mark refers to was conducted like this: Some male college
> students are given an attitude survey. They are then crowded into a
> small, darkened room, and made to view a piece of violent pornography on
> a flickering movie projector. They are then given the attitude survey
> again, and, presto, they appear more willing to disregard the sexual
> rights of women. How come?
> 
> First, the manner in which people fill out surveys depends not only on
> their attitudes, but also on their physiological state. In particular,
> adrenergic arousal will lead people to appear less tolerant of the
> rights of others, even if their attitudes did not in fact change. And
> certain stimuli are known to increase adrenergic arousal: crowding,
> darkness, flickering lights, depiction of violence. In the light of
> what we know about human behavior, pornography was not really
> necessary to produce the reported result. In all probability, Buggs
> Bunny cartoons would have worked equally well. The obvious follow up
> (which would not have cost 5 grand, much less half a million, but which
> in fact was never done, leading to certain obvious conclusions about the
> scientific motivation of the investigators) is to eliminate crowding,
> darkness, and flicker, and then compare the effects of a non-violent
> sex video with those of a Buggs Bunny cartoon of equal duration. Anyone
> care to bet on the result?
> 				Adam Reed (mtund!adam)

Road Runner cartoons are excellent examples of nonviolence....
How about showing them "Rambo" or "Dirty Harry"?
                    tim sevener   whuxn!orb