Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bellcore!whuxcc!lcuxlm!akgua!codas!mtune!mtunf!mtx5c!mtx5d!mtx5a!mat
From: mat@mtx5a.UUCP (m.terribile)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Re: porn report --- includes Virginia Masters quote ---
Message-ID: <1585@mtx5a.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 30-Sep-86 17:23:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: mtx5a.1585
Posted: Tue Sep 30 17:23:14 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 9-Oct-86 01:28:52 EDT
References: <1800@well.UUCP> <1566@mtx5a.UUCP> <5@oliveb.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: AT&T Information Systems, Middletown, NJ 07748-4801.
Lines: 38

> Page 42 has a letter from Virginia Johnson-Masters, of the Masters and
> Johnson institute.  A partial quote of the letter: 
> 
> "...the literature and our own clinical experience show no link between child
> sexual abuse and sexually explicite material.  While it has been clinically
> noted that some perpetrators read or view sexually explicite material, many
> others object to pornography as immoral.  In contrast to common belief, a
> great number of men who turn to their children for sexual purposes are highly
> religious or morally rigid individuals who feel that this is less of a sin
> than masturbation or seeking outside sexual liasons."
> 
> 						- Phil

Phil, I don't think that anyone is arguing that the sexually explicit materials
are used by pedophiles to arouse or excite themselves but rather that they are
used by some pedophiles to ``instruct'' their victims, to convince the kids
that ``it's ok, look at the people doing it ...'' There is at least testimony
to the effect that this is one of the means commonly used by pedophiles to
``seduce'' their victims.

I agree that this is not the ``fairest'' reason to consider restriction of
such explicit material, and it may be that it does not at all justify such
restriction, but don't you think we should examine if there is a way to remove
the stuff that is most useful to the pedophiles without removing the any of
the stuff more interesting to adults who do not wish to molest children?

Hey, at one time the NRA actually *supported* legislation against sawed-off
shotguns, which had/have no reasonable use in hunting, but which are great
for threatening storeowners.  Is such an approach possible here, and if so,
is it reasonable?  (I think that Adam might have something to say on this ...)
-- 

	from Mole End			Mark Terribile
		(scrape .. dig )	mtx5b!mat
					(Please mail to mtx5b!mat, NOT mtx5a!
						mat, or to mtx5a!mtx5b!mat)
					(mtx5b!mole-end!mat will also reach me)
    ,..      .,,       ,,,   ..,***_*.