Skip to comments.'Pornography': TV's taboo word
Posted on 11/25/2005 2:49:03 PM PST by wagglebee
Following a recent interview for yet another documentary on pornography, I thought of so many things I should have said about pornography.
I had discussed its role as producing impotence, robbing men of their manhood. I had addressed its psychopharmacology as an "erototoxin." I had documented its presence in adultery, divorce, rape, child sex abuse and incest.
Civility, humanity, I said, has always hung by the thinnest of threads. We allow ourselves to be coarsened at the greatest risk. Life in the last five decades should have proven to us all or at least to any hominoid with a modicum of sense that the license of licentiousness is always followed by the most heart-rending violence to our bodies and our souls. We can daily see around us that the most vulnerable, the smallest and the weakest pay the price for our arrogance and our appallingly selfish ignorance.
I watched television on and off this evening. I switched from one station to another, revolted by one sudden graphic depiction of a crime show's serial rapist torturing his female victims. Another station dramatized a vicious tale of children being prostituted by dad.
I next saw a defaced young male corpse, at first thought to be a boy who had defended a brutally raped young girl. Cadavers, once restricted to horror flicks are now a TV staple. The dead are commonly uncovered (still neck up) and discussed by a coolly attractive and yet sympathetic female coroner often a minority woman filling the professional working-woman diversity quota, while thrilling the desensitized audience at the same time.
On another station, "Dr. Phil's" team is seeking missing American girls. Their distraught parents on camera, Dr. Phil explains that the girls are doubtless dead or enslaved in the foreign sex traffic.
During commercials, a lovely female newscaster says stay tuned for the "news" story of an 8-year-old being marketed for sex. Also "coming up," says another professional lady news "reporter," police just rescued a kidnapped teenager who had been locked in a dog kennel and rented out for sadistic sex. The "news" announcement of coming attractions shows police carrying out the dog kennel should anyone miss the latest in "how-to" commit copy-cat sex hate crimes.
ABC's "Prime Time" righteously reports on the increase in sex crimes, including murder on American university campuses, suggesting that silly kids just don't protect themselves and that the universities don't police sufficiently. True, as far as that goes.
Naturally "Prime Time" makes no connection between sex crimes and their own fare such as "Desperate Housewives" entertaining the public with adultery, drug use, prostitution and mom's sex with teenage boys. "CSI" on CBS, NBC's "Law & Order," and "Sex and the City" are now inseparable from the "news" of dog kennels and Dr. Phil's search for child pornographers as we are driven into the pornographic sewer of thematic coming-of-age adventures.
"But, are you sure it's not just more reporting?"
In all of these emotional molecules of dramas and news stories, the good guys are good; prosecuting minorities and lady lawyers are wonderfully empathetic; coroners notably dispassionate but caring. Women are getting equal time as rape and torture victims and as professional legal and crime-solving mavens.
Of course, the Big Five mass media corporations, those which Michelle Malkin calls the most effective corporate pimps of human history Time Warner, Disney, Viacom-CBS, NewsCorp and AT&T are raking in the money by exploiting visual sado-sexual brutality as far as they can.
For unless it's "child pornography," TV dramas and news programs never use the word "pornography." No news or drama programs ever describe the media itselfas causing copy-cat crime and sado-sexual violence.
The mass media breeds serial-rapist-murdering juveniles and adults who imbibe their stimuli alongside Internet sex games and legal pornography, while Big Pharma hawks every sex and depression medication it legally can inbetween these increasingly pornographic programs.
One neurologist writes, our "brains are not in charge;" our bodies are our "subconscious minds." If so, our bodies are being aroused and conditioned to children locked in dog kennels for sex, cadavers coolly uncovered and sado-sexual lust dramas alongside Madonna (also on television the last day or so) as a new, happy "mom."
This is the same Madonna who tongue-kissed Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera on the MTV Awards in 2003, while her 6-year-old daughter (dressed in first-communion white, wearing a "BOY TOY" belt) tossed flower petals on the dance floor.
James Joyce of "Ulysses" obscenity fame, said all pornographic spectacles rouse the flesh to reflex actions of the nervous system. Yes, our body is our subconscious mind.
Ah, for those clucking, elderly ladies who kept the young in check by their repressive gossip, as described by Evelyn Waugh in "Brideshead Revisited." Gone.
Instead, we have widespread mass-media pornography to breed a cultural collapse that is beginning to rival the sado-sexual brutality and insanity of the likes of Titus, Caligula and Nero.
And they never will as long as they are profiting from it.
Moral absolutes ping.
Judith Reisman is a very good, wise and brave person. I'll ping this out later. Have to back away from the computer for a while, for my sanity's sake.
What more can be said. She hit the nail right on the head.
There were plenty of sex crimes (but likely much more of them unreported) and actually more open prostitution before TV ever existed.
Of course a lot of the nonsense in articles like this is based on a mythical sanitized past that we've since fallen from, that never really existed in the first place.
Pornography is like a drug. Very destructive to the user and all in contact with the user. Pornography does not always lead to criminal behavior, but increases the chances of it. YMMV.
Shhh....now repeat after me, extra-marital sex was invented by hippies...there never existed pornography until the 70s.
Did you catch the bit about how pornography is also implicated in causing impotence yet also plays a part in rape and incest? Sounds a bit contradictory. It also begs the question as to why, if pornography makes us so prone to falling to all of these ills, it can't be used as a defense or mitigating circumstance. The answer, of course, is that pornography makes you no more prone to committing certain acts than does poverty or a bad childhood. It makes us feel better, though, to think that evil people don't simply do evil things....that it is a choice. Instead, there is comfort in the idea that if we just avoid certain things we'll be nice and safe.
Whatever. I never saw hard core porno until college, and even then it was only the one or two weird guys in the dorm who had it. Now it's on TV, on the internet, on the news.
Yes the culture is becoming more profane and sexually soaked. Do you really think this doesn't lead to a increase in sex crimes? I find that hard to believe.
Nice try. But it was around 1970 that extramarital sex and pornography became mainstream and `acceptable'.
Before then, these behaviors existed and were confined to the gutter, where they belonged.
Yeah, that was pretty puzzling too, but it was her making a reference to some previous article she wrote. I'm sure her explanation of it was amusing.
Well, you need to document a drastic increase in sex crimes but ALSO SOMEHOW ACCOUNT FOR INCREASED REPORTING of a lot of sex crimes.
In many cases it's only been the last couple of decades where you're seeing a lot of sex abuse cases being reported, particularly when the perp is a community leader or person of authority.
Additionally, with the growth of 24 hour cable news channels and expanded local news, what sex crimes you do have will be reported more often with more time devoted to them giving more ability for lurid details to be reported, thereby increasing the PERCEPTION of their prevalence.
Back in the 1880s or 1920s where a lot of houses had live-in servant girls do you think the master of the house raping the girl was reported a lot?
And I assure you that Catholic Priests didn't suddenly start molesting altar boys in 1970; we're just seeing an atmosphere where accusations are more likely to be believed and it's more acceptable to come forward. A lot of people on FR would like to kid themselves it suddenly started because leftist hippies started entering the Seminaries, though.
Regarding Prostitution I'd argue there's a good chance it's actually less open and perhaps less common than it was in 1800s, with a smaller percentage of the male population patronizing them; haven't seen any hard numbers and of course they'd be difficult to come by, but I'd say it's clear that it hasn't suddenly taken off or something that's recent.
Forget about the sex crimes. What about the fact that it makes people emotionally numb and, while able to achieve multiple orgasms, completely unable to achieve emotional intimacy?
Recently Paris Hilton complained that all her boyfriends told her she was sexy, but not sexual. IOW, there was no emotional there there with her.
For the kind of guys she sleeps with to make that observation, that's a stunning object lesson of how soaking oneself with the wrong kind of sex (visually or otherwise) makes one emotionally, if not physically, impotent.
Porno chic took it to the mainstream. Famous celebrities flaunted going to see "Deep Throat".
It was on exhibit at the "regular" theaters, not just the "art house".
X-rated records, comics, films, and photos existed in the 1930s and before. They were never on public display and kept out of the eyes and ears of kids. Those kids grew up into adults and even grandparents, yet aren't always aware of just what was out there. The sale of some such materials was criminal.
Now you can get extreme entertainment at Best Buy, Borders, and elsewhere. Do they ID? Or if a movie says "unrated", anything goes? Those ratings don't mean a thing to the American Library Association.
There is a culture war going on. Some think that some things are "age appropriate" while others don't like "rules".
i whole heartedly agree there is no such thing as the gool old days.
but i think there is a vast difference in the tolerance and definition of 'sin'/morals. i.e. what is acceptable (especially to media).
Ted Bundy said that reading cheap detective magazines gave him the ideas he had about capturing and killing young women. I don't know what percentage of the population can be influenced like Ted but I suspect that pornography especially the violent type affects many criminal minds like Ted Bundy's.
blah blah blah. More divorce; more children engaging in sex; more diseas. You people have to wake up and smell the coffee! V's wife.
thank you for posting the reminder of the facts of history.
for my sanity's sake.
Know what you mean:)
Pornography does not always lead to criminal behavior
Shhhhh, Ted Bundy's listening in.
Those ratings don't mean a thing to the American Library Association.
At my public library, there are restrictions on what children can check out (e.g. no rated R movies) and parents are given the right to put further restrictions on the card as well. Accessing pornography is strictly forbidden. Those librarians get pretty livid if someone tries to.
If TV does not affect behavior, then why all the millions spent on commercials?
My, my so wise, how many yeads did itg take you to acquire all that wisdom. Not many I would venture.
If TV does not affect behavior, then why all the millions spent on commercials?
To give us some time to go to sleep so we will stay awake when the program is airing.
"how many yeads did itg take"
What's a yead? Are they related to those things I pull up out of my garden?
Nope little boys were always getting Blow Jobs in the back of the classroom during WW II.</sarcasm>
Then you are one under/over educated fool.
Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht frist and lsat ltteer is at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a wlohe.
I thinks i is a more perfectest rider thier ever were.
Sorry about that again. I'm sure qualified when first graders have to correct my grammar all the time.
My wife is a teacher and it is almost impossible today to teach without visual aids -- a DVD is the most effective method to get any idea into teenagers' heads. I don't think that kids are wired today to learn anything without seeing a video.
So yes TV does affect behavior otherwise we wouldn't be spending so much money producing learning videos.
Kudos to your wife for going into teaching.
I think she has the Emperor Titus mixed up with Tiberius. And is "hominoid" even a word? We have "humanoid" and "hominid," but what's with this new one?
The ALA's position as posted on their website is that there is no such thing as "age appropriate" material. They believe that if it is in the library, all patrons should be able to access it.
This doesn't mean to them avoiding stocking something like Madonna's Sex book or an "X" rated film like Last Tango In Paris, instead it means requiring parents to restrict their kids card (since by default the ability is there) so that they cannot check out ANY videos without parental approval. Not sure how the library wants books "limited" in access since no arbiter reviews books. There is a "code" for comics, but the x-rated works of Robert Crumb (which do have some valid content) carry no CCA code.
With the culture here, there are no x-rated videos in the video section and no books like the "Joy of Sex." When I worked in a library, that was the book that I found most commonly out of place.
That being said, it amazes me sometimes what parents will let their kids watch, even in a very conservative community such as mine.
Moral Absolutes Ping.
ABSOLUTELY MUST READ!!!
Even if you don't read anything else I ping out to you for two weeks, please! Read this one. Dr. Reisman, if you don't know, has been exposing the evil fraud Kinsey for a long time. She not only tells the truth, she writes in a succint, pointed, yet not extremist writing style. Anyone who reads this and disagrees is on the wrong side of the culture war.
Freepmail me if you want on/off this pinglist.
You know porn threads. Brings out the "porn is harmless" and "porn is exactly what Thomas Jefferson and all had in mind with the First Amendment" crowd.
People who claim that what they (or anyone else) watches, reads, listens to etc has no affect, your argument proves it to be a lie.
"If TV does not affect behavior, then why all the millions spent on commercials?"
Maybe she found that guys who look at pornography find it hard to have sex wih real women.
"Since 2000, the overall number of sexual assaults including those reported to police and those not dropped by 22%, according to the US Justice Departmentâs National Crime Victimization Survey, the nationâs most detailed crime measure."
"In the last decade, the US has experienced an unprecedented decline in the number of sex crimes; the total is down by 58% since 1993."
I'm in my '40s, and I remember the mythical TV of the '60s and '70s. There were cop shows, but nothing close to what's on TV today.
iPorn is the next wave. Kids can now download porn and bring it to school. Parents who otherwise monitor their childrens' on-line activities will now be defenseless.
Hmm. Dr. Judy seems to have a rather deep obsession with this subject.
I firmly believe evil people do evil things. And I believe it's evil to produce pornography and sleaze and market it in every venue and profit from it.
Children these days have to be protected from even mainstream TV programming and commercials. Our degraded culture is hostile to innocence and childhood, and therefore will go the way of all decadent cultures.
"If TV does not affect behavior, then why all the millions spent on commercials?"
I didn't say that sentence (I did a dumb response to it), but I do agree with you. It's one reason my parents nor I have ever gotten cable TV.
And you have a deep obsession with those who oppose pornography.
Classic talking point of those who promote vice. That if we opposed vice, we must be secretly engaging in it or attracted to it.
Your argument is nothing more than either sheer studidity or something you're copying from a list.
Just to prove my point, those who opposed slavery really were secret slave owners.
Those who oppose homosexuals indoctrinating schoolchildren that "gay is good - try it, you'll like it" are secretly strugggling with our attraction to homosexuality.
Those who oppose the restriction of gun ownership really want to take away everyones' RTKBA.
Those who oppose abortion are secret abortionists.
Those who oppose terrorism are secretly applauding jihadis.
Those who oppose human traffickers are secretly supporting forced sexual slavery.
Etc etc etc.
You think we're all stupid?