BYU student club: Students That Oppose Pornography

[MikeWaters]

http://newnewsnet.byu.edu/story.cfm/67694

The Lighted Candle Society aims to prosecute the pornography industry in the same way prosecutors attacked the tobacco industry. Justin Hart, vice president of communications for the society, explained it is not possible to use moral arguments in a court of law.

To prosecute the pornography industry, Lighted Candle Society has financed scientific research to prove that pornography causes severe problems within the brain. When researchers conducted fMRI scans on individuals who have been addicted to pornography for years, it was clear that "the part of the brain that deals with moral behavior failed to develop properly," Hart said. Essentially the person is brain damaged.

Well, there is a lot of brain damage occurring in Utah.

"We would hope that here in Utah we would not be following the trend of the nation," Alvord said. "However, we may be setting the trend. Utah ranks No.1 nationwide in Google searches for pornography."

A Deseret News article from October 2007 confirms this fact and gives other top Google searches in Utah.

A new theory on why Mormons aren't increasing their market share:

Harmer has spoken at many church firesides. Each bishop or stake president has told Harmer that pornography is the single biggest problem they face.

"The blight of pornography is Satan's last great hope to prevent the church from fulfilling its mission of preparing the earth for the savior's return," Harmer said.

This student group reminds me of Pete Townshend of The Who. Just be careful in doing "research." We don't want to find out that the President of the club has fallen from grace.....esp. after making statements like this:

"Pornography is destroying lives and it may literally destroy the next generation," Alvord said.

The article does briefly touch on the idea that pornography can be damaging to real-life sexual relationships. I don't have scientific evidence for it, but I would tend to agree with that.

[Levin]

Ross Douthat had a thoughtful piece on pornography.

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200810/adultery-porn

If the club wants to win hearts and minds, it should use better arguments than "this is your brain on pornography." Although I guess the fried egg worked in the war on drugs . . .

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Levin

Ross Douthat had a thoughtful piece on pornography.

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200810/adultery-porn

If the club wants to win hearts and minds, it should use better arguments than "this is your brain on pornography." Although I guess the fried egg worked in the war on drugs . . .

that's a pretty good article.

I like ethics in general, and that article is about the ethics of pornography.

[Levin]

I actually think one of the better arguments against pornography is Douthat's parting shot: shouldn't we aspire higher?

Porgnographers can defend their stuff as serving a purpose and need, but they can't defend it as being the better option.

I'm looking forward to Douthat's columns in the NYTimes. Young, thoughtful guy.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Levin

I actually think one of the better arguments against pornography is Douthat's parting shot: shouldn't we aspire higher?

Porgnographers can defend their stuff as serving a purpose and need, but they can't defend it as being the better option.

I'm looking forward to Douthat's columns in the NYTimes. Young, thoughtful guy.

Well, doesn't it make sense that descendants of men that claimed polygamy was the only way to avoid adultery would indulge in pornography?

I'm not saying I buy the argument, but it's interesting how the same argument that was used by some to justify polygamy is used now by people to justify pornography.

I once attended a lecture from a psychiatrist who specializes in sexual issues, at least that is what his lecture was on. He made the statement, "Not all sexual abuse causes harm." Wow, did that set off a firestorm. He wasn't justifying or condoning it, he was saying that not all sexual abuse results in damage.

Let's say that you buy that argument (btw, I was one of those arguing against him during the lecture). And let's say you buy the argument that pornography does not cause damage for all viewers. That doesn't mean that it is harmless or should be something that we aspire to.

I am reminded of the Bloom County Picayune: "The Truth with Bra Ads".

[Levin]

The problem with controversial descriptive statements like the professor's is that there almost always is a normative argument lurking in the background.

In the case of the doctor's, I'd bet a hundred bucks it was that we shouldn't punish sexual offenses so punitively.

[CardiacCoug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Well, doesn't it make sense that descendants of men that claimed polygamy was the only way to avoid adultery would indulge in pornography?

I'm not saying I buy the argument, but it's interesting how the same argument that was used by some to justify polygamy is used now by people to justify pornography.

I once attended a lecture from a psychiatrist who specializes in sexual issues, at least that is what his lecture was on. He made the statement, "Not all sexual abuse causes harm." Wow, did that set off a firestorm. He wasn't justifying or condoning it, he was saying that not all sexual abuse results in damage.

Let's say that you buy that argument (btw, I was one of those arguing against him during the lecture). And let's say you buy the argument that pornography does not cause damage for all viewers. That doesn't mean that it is harmless or should be something that we aspire to.

I am reminded of the Bloom County Picayune: "The Truth with Bra Ads".

That reminds me of a twin study out of Australia that I heard about in medical school that showed that being a childhood victim of physical or sexual abuse had very high correlation among identical twins (even raised separately) and much lower correlation among fraternal twins (even raised in the same household). The investigator said these data were unpublishable because no one would want to be known as the person who argues that kids are responsible (genetically, at least) for their own victimization.

I hate when political correctness interferes with science like that. Just give us the truth. We can handle it. And of course not all sexual abuse results in "damage" for the victim (especially widely varying, culturally based statutory crimes where both participants are willing). Some victims would recover just fine with no residual effects. That's obvious.

[Levin]

Originally Posted by CardiacCoug

And of course not all sexual abuse results in "damage" for the victim (especially widely varying, culturally based statutory crimes where both participants are willing). Some victims would recover just fine with no residual effects. That's obvious.

Not obvious at all. It's all how you define "damage" and "residual effects." I suspect I'd define them much differently than you if you think it's obvious some victims recover with no residual effects or some victims experience no damage.

Consent in youth is a very tricky thing, and there are many persuasive arguments for why youth can never consent to a sexual relationship with an adult, in the sense that consent means a fully volitional act of free will with full understanding and absent all distortionary influences. Of course if that's the definition of consent, then not even adults can consent in many instances, but there are self-evident reasons to apply such a definition to youth.

[MikeWaters]

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/65310.html

[Levin]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/65310.html

"But the larger point is to get young people accustomed to seeing adult movies as mainstream entertainment."

They won't hide in the shadows anymore, or behind the plastic covers, or on the back row of the magazine aisle.

Does the public know that their tax dollars are being used to screen porn movies at public universities? (Public dollars paid for the building and its maintenance.)

Had to say I got a chuckle imagining this happening at BYU, in the good old Wilkinson theatre.