1. IrvingSnodgrass - May 20, 1999 - 10:05 AM PT
There's another school shooting in the news today. How much does violence on television, the movies, or other entertainment media influence real life violence? In a recent Slate column, Jacob Weisberg attempts to define exactly what we are talking about here, and why we can't lump all violence into one category.
Have a look at Weisberg's column, and tell us what you think. Is there too much violence in entertainment? Or is violence in entertainment irrelevant?
2. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 10:36 AM PT
no doubt in my mind that the media encourages certain forms of violence, or puts into the head of somebody something that that person hadn't even considered as a possible option for a form of violence.
3. TabouliJones - May 20, 1999 - 10:50 AM PT
Speaking of ironic violence in films such as Natural Born Killers and Reservoir Dogs, Weisberg says the following:
"Here, I think the difference between the response of an adult and that of a child becomes crucial. (Check out the torture-dungeon scene from Tarantino's Pulp Fiction, in which drug dealer Marsellus promises sweet revenge to the man who has just raped him, above.) Adults, or at least most adults, recognize this as a species of black comedy, albeit one that expresses a real sadism on the part of the director. But to immature minds, the message may be simply that brutality is cool and funny. In other words, ironic violence may be desensitizing and stimulating to the young in the same way that pornographic violence is."
I think this is interesting, because the literary critic Northrop Frye once said that ironic literature is something that is wasted on highschool kids because they cannot assimilate it properly. Today, however, irony is ubiquitous in popular entertainment. Perhaps, then, there is a need for educators and family to somehow ensure that kids cultivate the sophistication required to "understand" irony. Not that such an education will necessarily prevent nutjobs from becoming nutjobs, but it couldn't hurt.
4. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 10:53 AM PT
i don't know, "educating" that things like this are just irony (which I'm not so sure it is anyway) and aren't really harmful at all seems like going about it the much harder way. wouldn't it be better to simply not expose our kids to this sort of nonsense in the first place?
5. TabouliJones - May 20, 1999 - 10:56 AM PT
"Wouldn't it be better to simply not expose our kids to this sort of nonsense in the first place?"
The ironic violence Weisberg refers to isn't always nonsense. And preventing kids from seeing such material strikes me as an impossible task. It exists; better to deal with it than wish its influence away.
6. Raskolnikov - May 20, 1999 - 11:25 AM PT
I am still not clear on exactly what is meant by "ironic violence" anyway. How is Reservoir Dogs ironic?
7. davidtudor - May 20, 1999 - 11:46 AM PT
Although the means continually become more and more diverse and sophisticated (we've come a long way from car chases, baby), if there is one common theme of most action movies it is the glorification/thrill of violence. This has to leave what most of us would think is a bad lasting impression on kids who watch this stuff.
But the usual residual impression that violence really doesn't cause pain is also insidious. People are either atomized or its equivalent or they are just dead. Slow lingering painful deaths or shots of paraplegics or mutilated but still live bodies don't show up all that often.
Granted, the dead are dead, but it seems surreal in the movies. Almost, as if violence is sanitized.
Oh well, at least its not like it was, say, in the 40s or 50s. Based on my limited experiences of watching Westerns or gangster movies of those days, it seems to me that death by gun in those days was as about as antiseptic as it could be. No blood, no pain. Perhaps the Code prohibited the showing of what purported to be blood.
The good guys causing the equivalent of immaculate death.
8. TabouliJones - May 20, 1999 - 11:47 AM PT
Rask,
I suppose that Weisberg is not talking about irony proper, but is perhaps isolating a sardonic and cheeky element in movies such as Reservoir Dogs and Nat. Born Killers -- i.e. a quality of self-parody and self-derision in the way the movie expresses itself. Highschool kids may see an homage to violence in these movies when what the directors really intend (and may or may not successfully achieve) is a critical examination of the fact that violence is being portrayed on film . . . or something like that; you know the usual po-mo complicit critique kind of thing. (Although some parts of Reservoir Dogs are ironic in the proper sense of the word: for example, the scene in which the undercover cop shoots the civilian.)
9. benear - May 20, 1999 - 12:02 PM PT
What a sneaky way to get us to read Slate.
10. Raskolnikov - May 20, 1999 - 12:06 PM PT
TJ: Okay, I can see that description as applying to films like Natural Born Killers (which I think is more successful as an example of gratuitous violence than it is as a satire of it). But I don't see it for Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction.
I have seen both described as "ironic", and I just don't see it, leading to my confusion over the meaning of the term in general. The basement scene in PF that Weisberg describes, for instance, is "graphic" and "righteous", using his categories. The scene is intended to be Bruce Willis' "war", just like his paternal watch-wearing ancestors had their wars, and the violence is portrayed quite realistically. The "medieval on their ass" line comes across as just revenge for a couple of rapists.
I think people look at the humor, and stylization, in Tarantino's films, and assume he isn't being serious in his movies, when instead they are best seen (IMO) as intertextual morality plays gussied up with great dialogue, suspense, and a film geek's sensibility of what "cool" is.
11. Raskolnikov - May 20, 1999 - 12:13 PM PT
david: I think the difference now is that a lot of action movies not only throw the graphic violence at you, but they do their damnedest to make it "fun" and "cool". I have been wrestling with this of late. I quite liked The Matrix, considering it the best action film to come out of Hollywood in almost a decade, but the violence in it is certainly intended to be thrilling and fun. During the slo-mo sequence where Reeves and companion break into the building, Reeves is decked out as a trench coat and sunglasses-wearing badass, looks damned cool, and engages in some fun kung fu and ballistic moves, all to a pulse racing techno soundtrack. I really liked the film, but I can't deny that it is part of the "problem".
12. TabouliJones - May 20, 1999 - 12:17 PM PT
Rask,
"I think people look at the humor, and stylization, in Tarantino's films, and assume he isn't being serious in his movies, when instead they are best seen (IMO) as intertextual morality plays gussied up with great dialogue, suspense, and a film geek's sensibility of what "cool" is."
This may be a better description of what Weisberg is trying to identify when he refers to these films as "ironic" (a word that is these days tossed about without much thought). What is key, I think, is the "intertextual" and "film geek's sensibility". That is, there is an element to these movies that screams out: "Hey your watching a movie here and let's not forget that." Adults may be better able to assimilate this quality. Highschool kids, on the other hand, may not have the tools needed to do so. Or, at least, this seems to be what Weisberg is getting at.
13. judithathome - May 20, 1999 - 12:35 PM PT
Does anyone know a teenager who sits for hours playing a mindlessly violent video game, one in which the player uses a gun-type shooter to blast away at whatever comes in view? And have you ever gone to the movies with that teenager and seen his jaded reaction as visions on the screen spurt blood and people die like flies at the hands of allegedly cool heroes? Scarey, isn't it? It is to me, especially when I think this kid has an IQ equal to his shoe size and probably thinks Irony is a failed rock band.
14. Raskolnikov - May 20, 1999 - 12:36 PM PT
TJ: yeah, my suspicion was that the word "ironic" was being abused. Its all Alanis Morrisette's fault.
But I think at least Tarantino's films are designed to work on two levels. They aren't just intertextual essays on the nature of gangster films and film noir. If you have never seen a single film noir, Hong Kong action film, or seventies exploitation film, you still get a kick out of both films because of the storytelling and dialogue.
However, I don't consider either film an example of the glorification of violence that I see as the problem. Both are morality plays which do not diminish the consequences of violence. In fact, both are much less graphic than most viewers remember.
If a complaint can be lodged at them, it is in romanticizing the gangster myth, which has been a valid criticism of Hollywood ever since Little Caesar.
I just want to make sure that a veneer of film geek sensibility and intertextuality doesn't excuse a film for being exploitative.
15. Raskolnikov - May 20, 1999 - 12:41 PM PT
Hell, I have played first person shooters like Quake and Doom (although not for three hours - anything more than a half hour or so gives me motion sickness) and I was all adrenalized by the kick-ass scenes in Matrix. I haven't felt the urge to kill anyone lately, but I consider myself a rather sane human being. My concern is the effect these films have on those who are a bit more off the deep end, or have more impressionable psyches.
16. judithathome - May 20, 1999 - 12:44 PM PT
Well, that is rather my point...I think there are more of them than persons like yourself, sane and smart.
17. AuNaturel - May 20, 1999 - 1:06 PM PT
"The American Academy of Pediatrics' fact sheet on media violence and its effect on kids reports that "[m]edia violence is especially damaging to young children (under age 8) because they cannot easily tell the difference between real life and fantasy."
Then it is the job of the parents to monitor what their young children are watching. Why do I get the funny feeling that this isn't the point the AAP is driving at...?
18. AuNaturel - May 20, 1999 - 1:18 PM PT
"if there is one common theme of most action movies it is the glorification/thrill of violence."
If there is one common theme of most fictional literature since the dawn of communication, it is the glorification/thrill of violence. We are just a tad bit more explicit than 30 years ago.
19. Raskolnikov - May 20, 1999 - 1:20 PM PT
My guess is that it is at least partially what they are driving at. Monitoring the viewing habits of an 8 year old is a lot easier than monitoring the habits of a high schooler.
20. ChristiPeters - May 20, 1999 - 1:21 PM PT
"Then it is the job of the parents to monitor what their young children are watching. "
I believe a parent should:
Monitor what they are watching.
Limit the amount as well as type of what they are watching.
Watch what they watch with them.
Discuss what they have seen when appropriate.
(Yes, I do all of the above, and I am one of those much-maligned single mothers who are supposed to be one of the reasons our society is supposedly falling apart.)
21. davidtudor - May 20, 1999 - 1:33 PM PT
AuN - I think you and I disagree on what the word *tad* means.
22. ChristiPeters - May 20, 1999 - 1:36 PM PT
"Monitoring the viewing habits of an 8 year old is a lot easier than monitoring the habits of a high schooler."
Absolutely! But if you've been doing it right up until then, you shouldn't need to monitor your high schooler as stringently. Most of my friends' children are high schoolers. The kids who had good, constant, parental guidance are kids who, as teenagers, are making good choices for themselves.
23. AuNaturel - May 20, 1999 - 1:39 PM PT
Davidtudor:
The only difference is that today when Odysseus pokes out the Cyclops eye, we get it in technicolor detail. Until modern times the kids had to imagine it themselves. And I'm sure they did.
24. ChristinO - May 20, 1999 - 1:51 PM PT
All of the movies mentioned so far in this thread have received 'R' ratings------No one under 17 admitted without parent or guardian.
I don't know if anyone remembers this but it used to be pretty difficult to get into an R-rated movie if you were under age. At least it was where I grew up. When I was in highschool in the late 80's my parents had to actually sign a waiver if they dropped me off for a Restricted movie that they did not intend to watch with me.
I am NEVER in favor of catering to the LCD. The omnipresence of violence in films and video games compared to the relative absence of a teen culture run amok says to me that TV can't "Make me do it" unless I'm already an unstable human being due to lousy parenting, education or brain function.
It all sounds like so much Ted Bundyism "Porn made me a killer".
25. cllrdr - May 20, 1999 - 1:56 PM PT
MSNBC, CNBC, CNN, and FOX are infinitely more violent than anything by Oliver Stone, Sam Peckinpah, Quentin Tarantino, et. al.
I've sent 109, Spudboy and Elliot an e-mail forwarded to me about a move to get the loathesome hris Matthews off the air. His carelessness in allow Kathleen ("He Forced Me To Touch His") Willey to blurt out her paranoid fantasies has nearly cost a man his life.
26. Jenerator - May 20, 1999 - 1:57 PM PT
Chris,
Are you saying that pornography did not influence Ted Bundy?
27. AuNaturel - May 20, 1999 - 1:58 PM PT
CP:
You catch my point.
28. cllrdr - May 20, 1999 - 2:00 PM PT
Pornography was Ted Bundy's excuse. He refused to "take personal responsibility."
29. ChristiPeters - May 20, 1999 - 2:00 PM PT
AuN -
I think so.
30. coralreef - May 20, 1999 - 2:02 PM PT
"I don't know if anyone remembers this but it used to be pretty difficult to get into an R-rated movie if you were under age."
Yes, it certainly was. In recent years the media treats kids going into R-rated movies as some sort of eternal unavoidable rite of childhood, but it used to be very difficult. And not that long ago at all. It's simple for a theater to do more to keep underage kids out: fire the employees caught letting them in. But they don't want to keep them out, since children today are some of the most prolific spenders.
'It all sounds like so much Ted Bundyism "Porn made me a killer"'
Maybe the violence doesn't cause violence per se but instead causes a desire to own and use weapons? Advertisers pay big bucks to get their products shown for even a few seconds in a major film, so they certainly believe that the high-profile in a movie can influence purchasing of a product. The Die Hard/Lethal Weapon type films are virtual infomercials for a wide arsenal of guns.
31. AuNaturel - May 20, 1999 - 2:03 PM PT
Jen:
Ted Bundy was a broken toy. Porn was the excuse he grasped at to avoid responsibility for his actions.
32. ChristiPeters - May 20, 1999 - 2:04 PM PT
Lil' Darlin' has not seen any R-rated movies.
Heck, *I* never watched any R-rated movies until I was in my late 20s. (Of course that had more to do with not having the price of a ticket than anything else)
33. coralreef - May 20, 1999 - 2:06 PM PT
I don't know if porn has any causal effect on violence but I think it's premature to rule it out. The fact is we simply don't know, and it's a mistake to use Bundy as an easy one-liner excuse to avoid that influence.
34. ChristinO - May 20, 1999 - 2:06 PM PT
Jen,
Yes. I'm saying that Ted Bundy was a sick, violent individual with no sence of personal responsibility or the value of any life but his own whether or not he ever saw a picture of a naked woman. Because of Bundy's depravity he was certainly drawn to violent pornography, but a lack of pornography would not have saved the lives of the women he killed.
- If pornography incites murder then why are there any people left alive in Amsterdam, Paris, Saigon and Prague? Serial killers are still extremely rare. Pornography is not.
- How much sense does it make to take the word of a condemned serial killer about anything in the first place?
35. harper - May 20, 1999 - 2:09 PM PT
I agree with ChristiP in Message #20
When I was a kid my mother was a real pain in the ass about what I could watch on TV & what movies I could see. In later years I appreciated it, but I was SO embarrassed when I was going to the movies with some friends (I was about 12 or 13) & my mother, who was driving us there, got out of the car & went into the theater to ask if the film was appropriate for kids my age! This was before film ratings, but if there had been film ratings, she still would have done it.
I think what I object to is something Weisberg didn't really discuss, but inferred in his piece -- *gratuitous* violence. I really hate it when the bodies fall for no reason except to up the body count. If they don't advance the plot, then maybe they don't belong there. People really *do* become jaded over gratuitous violence. I mean, there *is* a difference between people being killed in say, "Badlands" and people being killed in a generic "action movie". HOW many people do you have to kill to make the point?
WHY are kids watching movies like "Basketball Diaries" anyway? Where are their parents?
I think the media is neither good nor bad. What makes it either is what people do with it. The entertainment industry, frankly, can do what it pleases. It is up to individuals to pick & choose what they find acceptable.
36. ChristiPeters - May 20, 1999 - 2:13 PM PT
I choose to affect the entertainment industry by voting with my wallet.
If more people did so, fewer violent movies would be made. As long as violent entertainment makes big money, violent entertainment will be produced.
(can anyone say "DUH"?)
37. judithathome - May 20, 1999 - 2:14 PM PT
Movies like Basketball Diaries are MADE FOR kids....that's why they are watching them.
38. Jenerator - May 20, 1999 - 2:25 PM PT
Chris,
I'm not suggesting that pornography is the sole cause of Ted's murders. What I am saying is that it influenced him. Pornography can be like a drug for some. I think that pornography addiction is more frequent for males, too. Surely you think that pornography can be addictive and that it can harm a person? What I mean by harm is that if someone is inundated with pornographic images or films, one's sexual identity begins to be influenced by it. Oftentimes it takes more perversion to stimulate and it can influence their actions.
39. ChristiPeters - May 20, 1999 - 2:26 PM PT
They may be MADE FOR kids, but if the kids parents are paying attention and exerting their authority, the kids won't get to watch them.
Then the producers won't make enough money.
Then they will produce different movies.
(and, no, I *don't* think there "oughta be a law" - I'll parent my kid thankyouverymuch, butt out Big Brother)
40. judithathome - May 20, 1999 - 2:30 PM PT
Jenerator:
I agree with you and think that analogy can apply to watching violence, also...one can become inured to it quite quickly and need even more to cause shock or kicks or whatever.
41. ChristiPeters - May 20, 1999 - 2:34 PM PT
Jen -
I also agree. I think the person has to have some fundamental personality flaw to become a Ted Bundy, but I don't doubt that repeated viewing of violence and pornography can have a numbing or desensitizing effect. I think that violent pornography is particularly perniscious.
42. judithathome - May 20, 1999 - 2:34 PM PT
Well, ChristiP, you are an involved parent and one who actually cares about her child but there are parents out there who couldn't care less what their child sees. Of course, we should all do our best to protect children but unfortunately, many parents should have done their best by deciding not to HAVE them, for all the interest they show now they're here.
43. Raskolnikov - May 20, 1999 - 2:35 PM PT
Cellar: "MSNBC, CNBC, CNN, and FOX are infinitely more violent than anything by Oliver Stone, Sam Peckinpah, Quentin Tarantino, et. al."
Did you even read the Wesiberg piece? I think he does make some good, braod points. Not all violence is equal. Saving Private Ryan was infinitely more violent than a game of Doom, but in the former, the violence is sickening and shocking. In the latter, it is fun. I do think that the portrayal of graphic or sadistic violence as fun is quite damaging, and this is something the newsmedia isn't quite as guilty of.
44. Jenerator - May 20, 1999 - 2:35 PM PT
Christi and Judith,
I'm glad I'm not alone!;-)
45. AuNaturel - May 20, 1999 - 2:42 PM PT
One can be completely inured to violence on the screen (I know I am. It takes real psychological tension to get more than a yawn from me.) and still be very sensitive to the pain of others in real life.
Gratuitous violence in film has little or nothing to do with it. Gratuitous violence on television prior to 9 pm is fairly uncommon. Parents abdicating their responsibilities to their children has everything to do with it.
46. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 2:43 PM PT
In the instance of Bundy I *do* wonder if he wasn't just looking for a scapegoat to appease the fundamentalists that were looking for him to repent and turn to Jesus.
And then you'd have to define "pornography" anyway. Is Playboy the type of thing you people are talking about, or really violent stuff?
47. judithathome - May 20, 1999 - 2:46 PM PT
inconito:
Good point...can't use the old cop-out "I know it when I see it" 'cause I don't look for it but I guess there's really no way to define it. Kiddy porn might fit the bill....but one man's porn may be anothers art.
48. ChristiPeters - May 20, 1999 - 2:49 PM PT
incognito - I agree that maybe Bundy was just trying to continue to con, or to shirk responsibility or to....
Personally, I am referring to violent pornography and/or pornography which shows women either as simply objects or victims. I do not think that the naked human body is pornography - rather our bodies are gifts from God to be celebrated and treated with respect.
49. cllrdr - May 20, 1999 - 2:49 PM PT
The "depiction" of violence is not what interests me, Rask. News shows are quite discreet about what they choose to *show*. But they're wildly promiscuous about what they choose to *imply* or *refer to*
Here in Los Angeles ("The City where the Future comes to die," as my boyfriend calls it) an afternoon news block isn't complete without a freeway chase. The announcers salivate like jackals surrounding the carcass of a dead warthog at the prospect of a really nasty crack-up -- which is bound to happen sooner or later. But when it does, they'll cut away.
Remember that AIDS patient who blew his brains out on the freeway because his HMO was making what life he had left pure Hell On Earth? If you caught it you saw the whole thing. The shot was never repeated, of course. That would be "distasteful," and "irresponsible." Yeah, right.
50. ChristiPeters - May 20, 1999 - 2:51 PM PT
Judithathome Message #42 -
So what should we do about it?
I think it is sufficient to publicize the effect of violence and pornography, persuade and educate, and enforce the current rating system (ie, NO one under 17 in an R-rated movie).
51. ChristiPeters - May 20, 1999 - 2:52 PM PT
If we are not influenced by what we see, a lot of companies are wasting a lot of money for advertising.
52. ChristiPeters - May 20, 1999 - 2:52 PM PT
cllrdr - good points
53. AuNaturel - May 20, 1999 - 2:53 PM PT
"I do think that the portrayal of graphic or sadistic violence as fun is quite damaging."
Assuming you mean that DOOM is sadistic, fun and graphic it is perfectly obvious that you are wrong. Lots of people play DOOM and do not suffer any damage. Care to modify the statement?
54. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 2:53 PM PT
Christi and judith there is no question in my mind that if a person is into kiddie porn and then later goes out and starts raping children that there is a connection!
With the case of Bundy though I don't know what type of "porn" being referred to there. In other words I don't think one could make a strong link between his fancy with Playboy and then strangling women! But if he was into other forms of porn where, like you said, violence and treating women with terrible contempt were involved, I don't know why we wouldn't agree that there is a connection between the two.
55. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 2:54 PM PT
"(ie, NO one under 17 in an R-rated movie)"
I'm curious but once there films come out on video are there age restrictions at places like Blockbuster?
56. Jenerator - May 20, 1999 - 2:55 PM PT
Incog,
Why couldn't it be that he was just admitting to some of his problems? Serial killers are extensively interviewed (if possible), and it could be that at the end, he finally admitted to a major contributing factor. I seriously doubt that he would lie to appease any Christian.
57. ChristiPeters - May 20, 1999 - 2:55 PM PT
incognito Message #54 - yep. I agree with you there.
58. ChristiPeters - May 20, 1999 - 2:56 PM PT
incognito Message #55 - I don't think so. Maybe there should be, but I can't see how it would be enforced. So we are back to parental involvement again, aren't we?
59. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 2:57 PM PT
just as an aside, as a kid my parents were very strict on what we could and could not watch. we went as a family once to see a Burt Reynolds movie, Hooper I think it was. Anyway, it was rated PG so my parents were okay with it.
In the movie at one point some naked lady pops out of the cake and I guess this was one of the first PG movies to have any frontal nudity in it. My parents were shocked! And at age 11 I think, so was I! :-)
Unfortunately today I don't think an R rating is good enough, and what is PG-13 today seems at least to me to be on par with what was R a decade ago.
60. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 3:00 PM PT
"Why couldn't it be that he was just admitting to some of his problems? Serial killers are extensively interviewed (if possible), and it could be that at the end, he finally admitted to a major contributing factor. I seriously doubt that he would lie to appease any Christian."
We would be stupid to not at least allow the possibility that he was lying if for no other reason than because he was convinced at that point that maybe trying to get in good with some fundies trying to convert him last minute must do him well in the end. Who knows.
"Maybe there should be, but I can't see how it would be enforced."
Cart people like in a bar?
61. AuNaturel - May 20, 1999 - 3:00 PM PT
"If we are not influenced by what we see, a lot of companies are wasting a lot of money for advertising."
Advertising cannot do anything more than attract your eye and give information. (BTW, that *is* worth a lot of money!) If it's a product you aren't already interested in, no amount of advertising can induce you to buy.
62. ChristinO - May 20, 1999 - 3:01 PM PT
I have heard that Pornography is addictive. I don't know that I believe this since I haven't read any reputable reports on it. I have heard that some people are drawn to progressively more violent Pornography----this I do believe as I have seen evidence of it (not personally but from various reliable media) It has never been shown that most or even a great number of people are drawn to progressively more violent pornography. The people who are have other problems---pornography is a symptom of a greater disfunction.
So I'm back to the LDC again. I cannot support banning, undue restriction or "nannyism" intended to curb the very few at the loss of freedom for the vast majority.
Can we use violent pornography to track suspected felons as a kind of "psycho-meter" to hopefully prevent crimes? I suppose it would be possible, but I don't know that I could support that either because of the invasion of general privacy and the potential for abuse.
63. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 3:01 PM PT
"I seriously doubt that he would lie to appease any Christian.'
Sure he would! People do it ALL the time. For starters, we don't know how much pressure had been put on him by the people trying to convert him.
I'm not saying that what Bundy said wasn't entirely true, but I'm also not going to stand here and stake my claim that it was! Are you Jenerator?
64. Jenerator - May 20, 1999 - 3:02 PM PT
Incog,
I'm not entirely skeptical of Bundy's assertation because it is not a wild claim, and because I had to testify in a capital murder trial 2 years ago against a man who WAS addicted to pornography and killed a woman. To not consider the reality that pornography can be addictive and can influence a person is stupid.
65. Jenerator - May 20, 1999 - 3:04 PM PT
Message #64 is directed to Incognito and only Incognito.
66. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 3:07 PM PT
"To not consider the reality that pornography can be addictive and can influence a person is stupid."
If for some odd reason you said this to me because you think I have said such a thing, or because you think I believe such a thing, you ought to try a little harder to read. I just contracted such a notion about 10 posts ago.
67. AuNaturel - May 20, 1999 - 3:09 PM PT
"I seriously doubt
that he would lie to appease any Christian."
But maybe to get a last minute reprieve he'd try anything???
68. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 3:09 PM PT
"I had to testify in a capital murder trial 2 years ago against a man who WAS addicted to pornography and killed a woman."
what type of pornography? could you describe it for us (not in detail of course, but just so i know what you are talking about).
was there any connection made between the two that you know of?
why were you involved in such a trial if I may ask?
69. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 3:10 PM PT
AuNatural we just don't know do we? you make a good point! we just have really no idea what was going on in this guy's mind at the time, so close to being executed.
70. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 3:12 PM PT
what also interests me is that there is probably nobody around here that has voiced his like of pornography than BobaFett. I have even posted to him once or twice at how his comments degrade women and how hateful they are.
And I have also noticed, amazingly, that the very person here now deriding the ills of pornography has gotten nothing but giggles from Fett and is clearly one of his chummiest compatriots in the Fray. Interesting.
71. Jenerator - May 20, 1999 - 3:17 PM PT
Incog,
The defendant started off reading Playboy. Later he started watching your standard porno films. Then he progressed into grotesque themed magazines. Then he ventured into topless bars and brothels. Then he started buying volumous amounts of pornography. Then he got married (but hid his addiction). After about two years of marriage, their sex life turned bizarre. He wanted it at least 8 times a day. He even dabbled in bestiality. Later, he started watching S & M videos. He raped and murdered a woman. Two months later, he broke into a pornography shop and stole over 1,000 books and magazines. One month later, he got caught trying to abduct a woman.
When he was arrested, there were two blow-up dolls in his posession (one in his car and one his home).
72. AuNaturel - May 20, 1999 - 3:18 PM PT
"a man who WAS addicted to pornography"
I really hate it when people take a usefull word like "addicted" and destroy it's meaning by using it for any persistant behavior they don't like. "Obsessed with" might be accurate. Addicted? Nope.
73. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 3:18 PM PT
Message #71 I'd say that makes for a preeeeeetty solid case for your point of view Jenerator!
It is INDEED a slippery, slippery slope.
74. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 3:21 PM PT
i have seen similar slippery slopes where people, good people, allow things to creep into their lives, much like that pornography addiction Jen mentioned with the man on trial. before they know it they are doing things they didn't even think of doing before.
someone mentioned how pornography can desensitize a person, maybe it was Jenerator. and like the discussion about nude beaches and such i have to agree with Jenerator again.
it is indeed a slippery slope. if Bundy really DID recognize his sin and repent I'm glad he could do that. it is the people that fight tooth and nail while they go down the slope and never even know they are on it that i feel sorry for.
75. Jenerator - May 20, 1999 - 3:25 PM PT
Any people in particular?
76. AuNaturel - May 20, 1999 - 3:29 PM PT
"When he was arrested, there were two blow-up dolls in
his posession (one in his car and one his home)."
Proving that inflatable dolls are connected to rape/muder?
This was another broken toy. He had an itch to scratch. He tried Playboy, but that didn't cut it. He tried porn but that didn't work. He tried brothels and that didn't work. None of these steps satsfied so whe went beyond. Bestiality. Inflatable dolls. Sex 8 times a day.
This person had some kind of fundamental miswiring in his brain. Porn was an inevitable stop on his path the destruction, not the cause.
77. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 3:31 PM PT
I've actually had Christian friends that have justified certain things that on the surface appear quite harmless. But in time they continue to move down the slope, justifying more and more.
I have pointed this out to them and at that point, down the slope too far as it were, they copped an attitude, got all defensive, and actually DEFENDED their right to doing what they were doing.
Had they been more prudent much earlier they would never have gotten to where they are.
78. Jenerator - May 20, 1999 - 3:34 PM PT
"I have pointed this out to them and at that point, down
the slope too far as it were, they copped an attitude, got
all defensive, and actually DEFENDED their right to
doing what they were doing."
I believe that you pointed it out. Over and over and over and over and over and over. Am I right?
79. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 3:41 PM PT
"I believe that you pointed it out. Over and over and over and over and over and over. Am I right?"
Not exactly true but close!
I wouldn't have to point it out at all if they'd admit they have a problem. It went sort of like this.
Starting down the slope: "Hey, friend, what you are doing may not be the best thing to do."
But no change in action.
Further down the slope: "You know, what you are doing is only going to hurt you in the end."
Some recognition and actually some "repentance" but then right back to the actions again.
I could go on. But suffice it to say at some point my friend started to lie about related things, kept going further down the slope until finally was doing things that even he was shocked he had been doing!
But then guess what? Argued for his right to continue to flirt with these issues! So, like you said Jenerator, I told him AGAIN. But this time it was too late. He fought me tooth and nail at how wrong *I* was to even suggest he had a problem here. He got argumentative and downright mean to me, despite being friends for so long. And I realized that our friendship wasn't going to last much longer either.
He had gotten so far down the slope that he didn't even realize he was there. And his antagonism at the end made me realize that.
80. AuNaturel - May 20, 1999 - 3:42 PM PT
To me it seems pretty obvious this guy's "slope" he was slipping down was some kind of biochemical flaw inside his brain. Probably an obsessive compulsive disorder. Might have made it with the right medication.
It is entirely possible that porn and brothels were bushes growing on the slope he was slipping down and that he was grasping them to keep from sliding further. His slope was just too steep for it to work.
81. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 3:43 PM PT
usually the only reason there is a need to consistently point something out is because there is no real repentance, just words spoken in a feeble apology, but then right back to getting on the slope.
perhaps I should have cut my losses earlier with my friend, is that what you are saying Jenerator?
82. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 3:48 PM PT
I liken it to a guy standing on train tracks, with a Walkman on so he can't hear the train.
Somebody is in front of him and can see the train coming from behind him.
He starts to yell and scream at the guy, imploring him to get off the tracks before the train hits him.
For whatever reason, though, the guy ignores him and stays on the tracks.
The one warning him yells even more loudly and this goes on for some time until the train is almost ride on top of the guy on the tracks.
At that point the guy on the tracks takes off the Walkman and yells at the other guy warning him, telling him he is a crackpot and a dope and to leave him alone. For starters, he is plum tired of the other guy waving frantically at him.
Then WHACK! The train hits him.
83. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 3:49 PM PT
what is the guy warning him supposed to do when the man on the tracks won't listen to him?
if he cares about him, like I did my friend, he should probably yell and yell and keep on yelling and HOPE it helps.
if he doesn't really care, I suppose he'll yell once or twice and then just let the guy get whacked.
with my friend I yelled and yelled and yelled but it didn't matter to him. and then it was too late.
84. ChristinO - May 20, 1999 - 3:50 PM PT
Incog,
Child pornography is illegal. Anyone who goes to the lengths required to obtain such material is ALREADY beyond redemption. This person is ALREADY sick. Anyone who desires to view pictures of children engaged in sex acts has already crossed the boundaries of normal and quite likely has crossed beyond redemption as well. Sexual attraction to children is a sickness but you don't pick it up from a magazine.
Jen,
Likewise the defendant in your trial. If Playboy lead to sexual obsession and assault then every man in America would be behind bars and a goodly portion of the women as well.
85. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 4:04 PM PT
"Sexual attraction to children is a sickness but you don't pick it up from a magazine."
Agreed that it is sick ChristinO, but I'm not so sure it cannot be "learned." I'm more inclined to agree with the slippery slope mentality that someone could start in certain forms of pornography which over time no longer provide the stimulus this person craves. And soon he exposes himself more and more to other forms of pornography until he gets to really degenerate stuff. This line of reasoning doesn't seem unreasonable to me at all.
Is it provable? I don't know. But at least to me it sounds reasonable. Jen's example of the man in her trial probably wouldn't have gone out, what, ten years earlier (?) and killed a woman. But after going down the slope, taking steps further and further down the line, he got to a point where doing such a thing became an option.
Was he sick? Yes. But was he as sick in the beginning as he was at the end? I doubt it, but I don't know him so what do I know?!
86. AuNaturel - May 20, 1999 - 4:07 PM PT
C.O.
The old "porn leads us on to worse things" theory was discounted by two different presidential commissions on the subject. (Nixon and Carter?) The Meese Commission failed to reach a uninimous agreement on the subject largely due to Meeses political objections to what the scientists and statisticians had concluded. Porn is not a causal factor in sexual crime.
87. judithathome - May 20, 1999 - 4:08 PM PT
Not to belabor a point but I think Ted Bundy consistently proved himself to be a very manipulative, cunning man and he also loved the attention he received while in prison. I would seriously doubt he had anything but ulterior motives about anything he said while there.
88. ChristinO - May 20, 1999 - 4:14 PM PT
Incog,
It SOUNDS reasonable but that does not make it true particularly since the evidence is that Pornography does not drive people to sex crimes and murder. Again I point to the overwhelming abundance of pornographic material consumed by perfectly normal people.
As Au mentioned this man was quite likely suffering from a chemical imbalance in conjunction with some emotional or sexual trauma which LED him to pornography in order to assuage those desires. Had he never encountered pornography would he have continued to degenerate? We can't know for certain, but the smart money is on "yes". In fact it is possible that he would have moved to violence earlier had he not been able to slake some of that frenzy through artificial means.
89. stamper - May 20, 1999 - 4:17 PM PT
Jenerater
I have a question. Was it you that aasked meif i was related to some fellow? I said no before i thought it out. If you could provide me with this fellow's mother's maiden name, i might be related on that side of the family. But not on pa's side 'cause he was a MacDonald. thank you.
Now i am in a sad mood. today was so beautiful up here on the Oregon coast i could hardly stand it. We've had beastly weather for about three weeks which felt like three months, but today spring has sprung. The rhodies and the tulips were a sight to behold that that warm sun felt so good i was happy to be alive no matteer how hard the work was.
Then i here about another one of kids going goofy and it just about broke me up. What in the world is going on. I don't think it's these movies that Weisberg was talking about nor is it Playboy or even ranchier stuff. You people would not believe the kind of crap i viewed as a kid, and i nevewr shot anyone on purpose. I had my shotgun right in the kitchen corner, a single shot Iver Johnson 12 guage one. Used to kill doves every Sept not 50 yards from the frount door.
Something else is going on in this society and while i know i don't have the answers i know people aren't quite the same as they were when i was growing up and adults don't treat kids the way we were teated. We knew who the bosses were and it was just about any adult that saw us messing up and if one kicked my ass and i went home telling my dad, he'd just ask me why the guy did that. There was no point in lying 'cause he would go confront the guy and when he heard the truth the beating would be a whole lot worse.
What i learned was not to be doing things to get my ass kicked in the first place. Of course, that did not pertain to pa because he would beat on me for nothing so i tried very hard to give him reason. it seems to me he never liked me from the first time he eye balled me.
90. incognito - May 20, 1999 - 4:26 PM PT
judith Message #87 my point exactly but for some odd reason Jenerator didn't even want to allow the possibility.
AuNaturel Message #86 thank you for that I didn't know it!
ChristinO Message #88 You make some good points!
91. AuNaturel - May 20, 1999 - 4:27 PM PT
For an interesting discussion of obscenity and pornography, check out the British Columbia Commission on Obscenity and Pornography from 1963.
92. AuNaturel - May 20, 1999 - 4:31 PM PT
There is strong support for the safety valve theory of pornography. Even if one were to show that the availability of porn somehow "led some people over the edge", (soenthing I don't see any evidence for) it remains to be proven that the prohibition of porn won't lead to an even worse scenario.
93. ChristinO - May 20, 1999 - 4:33 PM PT
Stamper,
Glad to hear your weather is better. I'm sorry your dad was so heavy handed for no reason, but I have to agree with you about discipline and boundaries. While I don't approve of the old-time notion of children as chattel I think that the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction where we treat children as some kind of sacred alien species who will be destroyed if we reprimand them or don't allow them to do whatever the hell they want.
Niner has mentioned a similar childhood in that any adult on the block would give you what-for if you were caught misbehaving.
No child ever died or grew up stricken because he didn't get his way all the time but a lot of them grow up to be perfect assholes because nobody ever taught them respect for others as children.
94. ChristinO - May 20, 1999 - 4:38 PM PT
Okay, I've gotta hit the road.
Good evenings to you all.
95. stamper - May 20, 1999 - 4:46 PM PT
ChristinO
Thank you very much for the nice posts and it obvious you were brought up much like me. Now i ain't asking for pity when i talk about my old man, 'cause once i handled him life has been a piece of cake. Sure there's been ups and down, but that's life. "Course when Dolly had to have surgery for cancer three years back, i come near to loosing it.
96. incognito - May 21, 1999 - 8:13 AM PT
Jenerator I'm trying to understand your approach here. Let's say that guy in the trial you talked about was a very good friend of yours, one that you really care about, and further, let's assume we can "rate" the porno he was interested in on a scale from 1 to 10, 1 being the mildest.
He starts at 1 and you tell him he should stop. He ignores this and moved up to, let's say, #6. You have been telling him this is bad for him, and at #6 he realizes that what he has been doing is bad.
But instead of leaving the porno altogether, he moves back to say level 2 or 3. Would you tell him this is foolish, that the "slippery slope" is bound to happen again given his past? Or would you just leave him alone, knowing in your own heart (as we have seen in your expressed views) that milder forms WILL lead him back to stronger forms?
And if you told him that it was foolish on his part to still think he could flirt with porno, after all the others things he had done, he told you to bug off and deal with it, would you still warn the guy?
97. tckrulak - May 21, 1999 - 8:42 AM PT
Au Naturel:
"Porn is not a causal factor in sexual crime."
Are you serious? Show me a sexual criminal who is NOT into porno. Seriously, I don't think you could do it. I can easily believe that a person who begins the spiral towards becoming a sexual criminal may start out a little unbalanced. But if you take someone with a screw loose and start exposing him to materials that denigrate women, then to movies that do the same, and finally to S&M and snuff films can you honestly say that this will not influence his actions? I think the evidence does NOT support your claim. Again, I challenge you to find a sexual criminal who has not been influenced by pornography. I bet you that you can't find one.
98. incognito - May 21, 1999 - 8:46 AM PT
"But if you take someone with a screw loose and start exposing him to materials that denigrate women, then to movies that do the same, and finally to S&M and snuff films can you honestly say that this will not influence his actions?"
I just find these sorts of arguments very compelling, even in the absence of "official studies" that seemingly make no connection.
But I'm not even sure you have to "originally" have a screw loose before exposure to things like this degenerate you.
It is AGAIN for this reason that I bring up the slippery slope phrase. If a person has ALREADY shown a propensity toward a certain behavior, it is far far better to just separate oneself from even being tempted toward that behavior ever again, then to foolishly think "Well, THIS time I won't do what I did earlier."
99. ChristinO - May 21, 1999 - 8:55 AM PT
Tckrulak,
Were you aware that child molesters often keep pictures of children that are as innocuous as ads from the Sears catalogue? Should we ban all pictures of children because some sicko might get off on it? Should our entire society live like criminals just because some of us are?
A sexual predator is a sexual predator and as such may be drawn to pornography, but pornography does not create sexual predators.
100. Jenerator - May 21, 1999 - 8:57 AM PT
Incog, Tck, and Au,
The person who I mentioned earlier (the criminal) lost a job because of absenteeism resulting from chronic masturbation. Clearly, the guy was addicted to pornography.